Abstract
Many contractors have argued that Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) produce useless deliverable documents at a great cost. They go on to argue that Government reliance on such deliverable data interferes with their engineering efforts and needlessly drives up contract costs. On the other hand, contracting agencies doubt their ability to understand and oversee complex software development projects without the deliverable documents described by the DIDs.
This paper argues that military software should be documented in several ways. Ada source code can be used for part of the needed documentation. Other documentation is best provided by the management and engineering data that resides in contractor's CASE tools or in their engineering notes. A reasonable approach to documenting military Ada software uses contractor data in native form wherever possible and supplements it with deliverable data prepared in accordance with commercial or tailored military DIDs wherever the contractor data is inadequate.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Abbreviations
- ACM:
-
Association for Computing Machinery
- ADL:
-
Ada Design Language
- AMSDL:
-
Acquisition Management System and Data Requirements Control List
- CAD/CAM:
-
Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing
- CASE:
-
Computer-Aided Software Engineering
- CMM:
-
Capability Maturity Model for Software
- CSC:
-
Computer Software Component
- CSCI:
-
Computer Software Configuration Item
- CSU:
-
Computer Software Unit
- DID:
-
Data Item Description
- DoD:
-
Department of Defense
- IEEE:
-
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
- PDSS:
-
Post-Deployment Software Support
- SCM:
-
Software Configuration Management
- SDD:
-
Software Design Document
- SDF:
-
Software Development File
- SDP:
-
Software Development Plan
- SDSAWG:
-
Software Development Standards and Ada Working Group
- SEI:
-
Software Engineering Institute
- SIGAda:
-
Special Interest Group on Ada
- SQA:
-
Software Quality Assurance
- SRS:
-
Software Requirements Specification
- SSPM:
-
Software Standards and Procedures Manual
- UDF:
-
Unit Development Folder
- VDD:
-
Version Description Document
- WESCON:
-
Western Electronic Show and Convention
References
Royce, Winston W., “Managing The Development of Large Software Systems,” in Proceedings of IEEE WESCON, 1970, pages 1–9.
Parnas, David Lorge and Clements, Paul C., “A Rational Design Process: How and Why to Fake It,” in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-12, No. 2, February 1986, pages 251–257.
Paulk, Mark C. et al., Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1, Software Engineering Institute, February 1993.
DOD 5010.12-L, AMSDL (Acquisition Management System and Data Requirements Control List), April 1, 1994.
Booch, Grady, Object Oriented Design: With Applications (Benjamin/Cummings: Redwood City, CA), page 461.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gray, L. (1994). How should military Ada software be documented?. In: Toussaint, M. (eds) Ada in Europe. Ada-Europe 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 887. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58822-1_98
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58822-1_98
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58822-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49110-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive