UNIT- II

Understanding Requirements: Requirements Engineering, Establishing the groundwork,

Eliciting Requirements, Developing Use Cases, Building the requirements model, Negotiating
Requirements, Validating Requirements.
Requirements Modeling (Scenarios, Information and Analysis Classes): Requirements
Analysis, Scenario-Based Modeling, UML Models that Supplement the Use Case,
Data Modeling Concepts, Class-Based Modeling.
Requirements Modeling (Flow, Behavior, Patterns and WEBAPPS): Requirements Modeling
Strategies, Flow-Oriented Modeling, Creating a Behavioral Model, Patterns for Requirements
Modeling, Requirements Modeling for WebApps.

Understanding Requirements
REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING
Requirements analysis, also called requirements engineering, is the process of
determining user expectations for a new or modified product. Requirements engineering is a
major software engineering action that begins during the communication activity and
continues into the modeling activity. It must be adapted to the needs of the process, the project,
the product, and the people doing the work. Requirements engineering builds a bridge to design
and construction.
Requirements engineering provides the appropriate mechanism for understanding what
the customer wants, analyzing need, assessing feasibility, negotiating a reasonable solution,
specifying the solution unambiguously, validating the specification, and managing the
requirements as they are transformed into an operational system. It encompasses seven distinct
tasks: inception, elicitation, elaboration, negotiation, specification, validation, and
management.
Inception : It establish a basic understanding of the problem, the people who want a solution,
the nature of the solution that is desired, and the effectiveness of preliminary communication and
collaboration between the other stakeholders and the software team.
Elicitation: In this stage, proper information is extracted to prepare to document the
requirements. It certainly seems simple enough—ask the customer, the users, and others what the
objectives for the system or product are, what is to be accomplished, how the system or product
fits into the needs of the business, and finally, how the system or product is to be used on a day-
to-day basis.
• Problems of scope. The boundary of the system is ill-defined or the customers/users
specify unnecessary technical detail that may confuse, rather than clarify, overall system
objectives.
• Problems of understanding. The customers/users are not completely sure of what is
needed, have a poor understanding of the capabilities and limitations of their computing
environment, don’t have a full understanding of the problem domain, have trouble
communicating needs to the system engineer, omit information that is believed to be
“obvious,” specify requirements that conflict with the needs of other customers/users, or
specify requirements that are ambiguous or un testable.
• Problems of volatility. The requirements change over time.
Elaboration: The information obtained from the customer during inception and elicitation is
expanded and refined during elaboration. This task focuses on developing a refined requirements
model that identifies various aspects of software function, behavior, and information. Elaboration
is driven by the creation and refinement of user scenarios that describe how the end user (and
other actors) will interact with the system.

Negotiation: To negotiate the requirements of a system to be developed, it is necessary to

identify conflicts and to resolve those conflicts. You have to reconcile these conflicts through a
process of negotiation. Customers, users, and other stakeholders are asked to rank requirements
and then discuss conflicts in priority. Using an iterative approach that prioritizes requirements,
assesses their cost and risk, and addresses internal conflicts, requirements are eliminated,
combined, and/or modified so that each party achieves some measure of satisfaction.

Specification: The term specification means different things to different people. A

specification can be a written document, a set of graphical models, a formal mathematical model,
a collection of usage scenarios, a prototype, or any combination of these.
Validation: The work products produced as a consequence of requirements engineering are
assessed for quality during a validation step. Requirements validation examines the specification
to ensure that all software requirements have been stated unambiguously; that inconsistencies,
omissions, and errors have been detected and corrected; and that the work products conform to
the standards established for the process, the project, and the product.
The primary requirements validation mechanism is the technical review. The review
team that validates requirements includes software engineers, customers, users, and other
stakeholders who examine the specification looking for errors in content or interpretation, areas
where clarification may be required, missing information, inconsistencies, conflicting
requirements, or unrealistic requirements.
Requirements management. Requirements for computer-based systems change, and the desire
to change requirements persists throughout the life of the system. Requirements management is a
set of activities that help the project team identify, control, and track requirements and changes
to requirements at any time as the project proceeds. Many of these activities are identical to the
software configuration management (SCM) techniques.

ESTABLISHING THE GROUNDWORK

Identifying Stakeholders
A stakeholder is anyone who has a direct interest in or benefits from the system that is to
be developed. At inception, you should create a list of people who will contribute input as
requirements are elicited..
Recognizing Multiple Viewpoints
Because many different stakeholders exist, the requirements of the system will be
explored from many different points of view. The information from multiple viewpoints is
collected, emerging requirements may be inconsistent or may conflict with one another.
Working toward Collaboration
The job of a requirements engineer is to identify areas of commonality and areas of
conflict or inconsistency. It is, of course, the latter category that presents a challenge.
Collaboration does not necessarily mean that requirements are defined by committee. In many
cases, stakeholders collaborate by providing their view of requirements, but a strong “project
champion”(e.g., a business manager or a senior technologist) may make the final decision about
which requirements make the cut.
 Asking the First Questions
Questions asked at the inception of the project should be “context free” . The first set of context-
free questions focuses on the customer and other stakeholders, the overall project goals and
benefits. For example, you might ask:
• Who is behind the request for this work?
• Who will use the solution?
• What will be the economic benefit of a successful solution?
• Is there another source for the solution that you need?
These questions help to identify all stakeholders who will have interest in the software to be
built. In addition, the questions identify the measurable benefit of a successful implementation
and possible alternatives to custom software development.
The next set of questions enables you to gain a better understanding of the problem and
allows the customer to voice his or her perceptions about a solution:
• How would you characterize “good” output that would be generated by a successful
solution?
• What problem(s) will this solution address?
• Can you show me (or describe) the business environment in which the solution will be
used?
• Will special performance issues or constraints affect the way the solution is approached?
The final set of questions focuses on the effectiveness of the communication activity itself.
Gause and Weinberg call these “meta-questions” and propose the following list:
• Are you the right person to answer these questions? Are your answers
• “official”?
• Are my questions relevant to the problem that you have?
• Am I asking too many questions?
• Can anyone else provide additional information?
• Should I be asking you anything else?
These questions will help to “break the ice” and initiate the communication that is essential to
successful elicitation. But a question-and-answer meeting format is not an approach that has been
overwhelmingly successful.
 ELICITING REQUIREMENTS
Requirements elicitation (also called requirements gathering) combines elements of problem
solving, elaboration, negotiation, and specification
Collaborative Requirements Gathering
Many different approaches to collaborative requirements gathering have been proposed. Each
makes use of a slightly different scenario, but all apply some variation on the following basic
guidelines:
• Meetings are conducted and attended by both software engineers and other stakeholders.
• Rules for preparation and participation are established.
• An agenda is suggested that is formal enough to cover all important points but informal
enough to encourage the free flow of ideas.
• A “facilitator” (can be a customer, a developer, or an outsider) controls the meeting.
• A “definition mechanism” (can be work sheets, flip charts, or wall stickers or
• an electronic bulletin board, chat room, or virtual forum) is used.
The goal is to identify the problem, propose elements of the solution, negotiate different
approaches, and specify a preliminary set of solution requirements in an atmosphere that is
conducive to the accomplishment of the goal.
During inception basic questions and answers establish the scope of the problem and the
overall perception of a solution. Out of these initial meetings, the developer and customers write
a one- or two-page “product request.”
A meeting place, time, and date are selected; a facilitator is chosen; and attendees from
the software team and other stakeholder organizations are invited to participate. The product
request is distributed to all attendees before the meeting date.
While reviewing the product request in the days before the meeting, each attendee is
asked to make a list of objects that are part of the environment that surrounds the system, other
objects that are to be produced by the system, and objects that are used by the system to perform
its functions. In addition, each attendee is asked to make another list of services that manipulate
or interact with the objects. Finally, lists of constraints (e.g., cost, size, business rules) and
performance criteria (e.g., speed, accuracy) are also developed. The attendees are informed that
the lists are not expected to be exhaustive but are expected to reflect each person’s perception of
the system.
 The lists of objects can be pinned to the walls of the room using large sheets of paper,
stuck to the walls using adhesive-backed sheets, or written on a wall board. After individual lists
are presented in one topic area, the group creates a combined list by eliminating redundant
entries, adding any new ideas that come up during the discussion, but not deleting anything.
Quality Function Deployment
Quality function deployment (QFD) is a quality management technique that translates the
needs of the customer into technical requirements for software. QFD “concentrates on
maximizing customer satisfaction from the software engineering process”. To accomplish
this, QFD emphasizes an understanding of what is valuable to the customer and then deploys
these values throughout the engineering process.
QFD identifies three types of requirements :
• Normal requirements. The objectives and goals that are stated for a product or system
during meetings with the customer. If these requirements are present, the customer is
satisfied. Examples of normal requirements might be requested types of graphical
displays, specific system functions, and defined levels of performance.
• Expected requirements. These requirements are implicit to the product or system and
may be so fundamental that the customer does not explicitly state them. Their absence
will be a cause for significant dissatisfaction.
• Exciting requirements. These features go beyond the customer’s expectations and prove
to be very satisfying when present.
Although QFD concepts can be applied across the entire software process, QFD uses customer
interviews and observation, surveys, and examination of historical data as raw data for the
requirements gathering activity. These data are then translated into a table of requirements—
called the customer voice table—that is reviewed with the customer and other stakeholders.
Usage Scenarios
As requirements are gathered, an overall vision of system functions and features begins to
materialize. However, it is difficult to move into more technical software engineering activities
until you understand how these functions and features will be used by different classes of end
users. To accomplish this, developers and users can create a set of scenarios that identify a thread
of usage for the system to be constructed. The scenarios, often called use cases, provide a
description of how the system will be used.
 Elicitation Work Products
The work products produced as a consequence of requirements elicitation will vary depending on
the size of the system or product to be built. For most systems, the work products include
• A statement of need and feasibility.
• A bounded statement of scope for the system or product.
• A list of customers, users, and other stakeholders who participated in requirements
elicitation.
• A description of the system’s technical environment.
• A list of requirements and the domain constraints that apply to each.
• A set of usage scenarios that provide insight into the use of the system or product under
different operating conditions.
• Any prototypes developed to better define requirements.
Each of these work products is reviewed by all people who have participated in requirements
elicitation.

DEVELOPING USE CASES

Use cases are defined from an actor’s point of view. An actor is a role that people (users)
or devices play as they interact with the software.
The first step in writing a use case is to define the set of “actors” that will be involved in
the story. Actors are the different people (or devices) that use the system or product within the
context of the function and behavior that is to be described.
Actors represent the roles that people (or devices) play as the system operates. Defined
somewhat more formally, an actor is anything that communicates with the system or product and
that is external to the system itself. Every actor has one or more goals when using the system. It
is important to note that an actor and an end user are not necessarily the same thing. A typical
user may play a number of different roles when using a system, whereas an actor represents a
class of external entities (often, but not always, people) that play just one role in the context of
the use case. Different people may play the role of each actor.
Because requirements elicitation is an evolutionary activity, not all actors are identified
during the first iteration. It is possible to identify primary actors during the first iteration and
secondary actors as more is learned about the system.
 Primary actors interact to achieve required system function and derive the intended
benefit from the system. Secondary actors support the system so that primary actors can do their
work. Once actors have been identified, use cases can be developed.
Jacobson suggests a number of questions that should be answered by a use case:
• Who is the primary actor, the secondary actor(s)?
• What are the actor’s goals?
• What preconditions should exist before the story begins?
• What main tasks or functions are performed by the actor?
• What exceptions might be considered as the story is described?
• What variations in the actor’s interaction are possible?
• What system information will the actor acquire, produce, or change?
• Will the actor have to inform the system about changes in the external environment?
• What information does the actor desire from the system?
• Does the actor wish to be informed about unexpected changes?
The basic use case presents a high-level story that describes the interaction between the actor and
the system.

BUILDING THE REQUIREMENTS MODEL

The intent of the analysis model is to provide a description of the required informational,
functional, and behavioral domains for a computer-based system. The model changes
dynamically as you learn more about the system to be built, and other stakeholders understand
more about what they really require..
Elements of the Requirements Model
The specific elements of the requirements model are dictated by the analysis modeling method
that is to be used. However, a set of generic elements is common to most requirements models.
• Scenario-based elements. The system is described from the user’s point of view using a
scenario-based approach.
• Class-based elements. Each usage scenario implies a set of objects that are manipulated
as an actor interacts with the system. These objects are categorized into classes—a
collection of things that have similar attributes and common behaviors.
 • Behavioral elements. The behavior of a computer-based system can have a profound
effect on the design that is chosen and the implementation approach that is applied.
Therefore, the requirements model must provide modeling elements that depict behavior.
• Flow-oriented elements. Information is transformed as it flows through a computer-
based system. The system accepts input in a variety of forms, applies functions to
transform it, and produces output in a variety of forms.
Analysis Patterns
Analysis patterns suggest solutions (e.g., a class, a function, a behavior) within the
application domain that can be reused when modeling many applications.
Geyer-Schulz and Hahsler suggest two benefits that can be associated with the use of
analysis patterns:
First, analysis patterns speed up the development of abstract analysis models that capture the
main requirements of the concrete problem by providing reusable analysis models with examples
as well as a description of advantages and limitations.
Second, analysis patterns facilitate the transformation of the analysis model into a design model
by suggesting design patterns and reliable solutions for common problems.
Analysis patterns are integrated into the analysis model by reference to the pattern name.

NEGOTIATING REQUIREMENTS
The intent of negotiation is to develop a project plan that meets stakeholder needs while
at the same time reflecting the real-world constraints (e.g., time, people, budget) that have been
placed on the software team. The best negotiations strive for a “win-win” result. That is,
stakeholders win by getting the system or product that satisfies the majority of their needs and
you win by working to realistic and achievable budgets and deadlines.
Boehm defines a set of negotiation activities at the beginning of each software process
iteration. Rather than a single customer communication activity, the following activities are
defined:
1. Identification of the system or subsystem’s key stakeholders.
2. Determination of the stakeholders’ “win conditions.”
3. Negotiation of the stakeholders’ win conditions to reconcile them into a set of win-win
conditions for all concerned.
Successful completion of these initial steps achieves a win-win result, which becomes the key
criterion for proceeding to subsequent software engineering activities.

VALIDATING REQUIREMENTS
As each element of the requirements model is created, it is examined for inconsistency,
omissions, and ambiguity. The requirements represented by the model are prioritized by the
stakeholders and grouped within requirements packages that will be implemented as software
increments.
A review of the requirements model addresses the following questions:
• Is each requirement consistent with the overall objectives for the system/product?
• Have all requirements been specified at the proper level of abstraction? That is, do some
requirements provide a level of technical detail that is inappropriate at this stage?
• Is the requirement really necessary or does it represent an add-on feature that may not be
essential to the objective of the system?
• Is each requirement bounded and unambiguous?
• Does each requirement have attribution? That is, is a source (generally, a specific
individual) noted for each requirement?
• Do any requirements conflict with other requirements?
• Is each requirement achievable in the technical environment that will house the system or
product?
• Is each requirement testable, once implemented?
• Does the requirements model properly reflect the information, function, and behavior of
the system to be built?
• Has the requirements model been “partitioned” in a way that exposes progressively more
detailed information about the system?
• Have requirements patterns been used to simplify the requirements model?
• Have all patterns been properly validated? Are all patterns consistent with customer
requirements?
These and other questions should be asked and answered to ensure that the requirements
model is an accurate reflection of stakeholder needs and that it provides a solid foundation
for design.
 REQUIREMENTS MODELING: SCENARIOS,
INFORMATION, AND ANALYSIS CLASSES
REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS
Requirements analysis results in the specification of software’s operational characteristics,
indicates software’s interface with other system elements, and establishes constraints that
software must meet. Requirements analysis allows you to elaborate on basic requirements
established during the inception, elicitation, and negotiation tasks that are part of requirements
engineering.
The requirements modeling action results in one or more of the following types of models:
• Scenario-based models of requirements from the point of view of various system
“actors”
• Data models that depict the information domain for the problem
 Class-oriented models that represent object-oriented classes (attributes and operations)
and the manner in which classes collaborate to achieve system requirements
 Flow-oriented models that represent the functional elements of the system and how they
transform data as it moves through the system
 Behavioral models that depict how the software behaves as a consequence of external
“events”
These models provide a software designer with information that can be translated to
architectural, interface, and component-level designs. Finally, the requirements model provides
the developer and the customer with the means to assess quality once software is built.
Throughout requirements modeling, primary focus is on what, not how. What user
interaction occurs in a particular circumstance, what objects does the system manipulate, what
functions must the system perform, what behaviors does the system exhibit, what interfaces are
defined, and what constraints apply?
 Fig : The requirements model as a bridge between the system description and the design model

The requirements model must achieve three primary objectives:

(1) To describe what the customer requires,
(2) to establish a basis for the creation of a software design, and
(3) to define a set of requirements that can be validated once the software is built.
The analysis model bridges the gap between a system-level description that describes overall
system or business functionality as it is achieved by applying software, hardware, data, human,
and other system elements and a software design that describes the software’s application
architecture, user interface, and component-level structure.
Analysis Rules of Thumb
Arlow and Neustadt suggest a number of worthwhile rules of thumb that should be followed
when creating the analysis model:
• The model should focus on requirements that are visible within the problem or
business domain. The level of abstraction should be relatively high.
• Each element of the requirements model should add to an overall understanding of
software requirements and provide insight into the information domain, function, and
behavior of the system.
• Delay consideration of infrastructure and other nonfunctional models until design.
That is, a database may be required, but the classes necessary to implement it, the
functions required to access it, and the behavior that will be exhibited as it is used should
be considered only after problem domain analysis has been completed.
 • Minimize coupling throughout the system. It is important to represent relationships
between classes and functions. However, if the level of “interconnectedness” is extremely
high, effort should be made to reduce it.
• Be certain that the requirements model provides value to all stakeholders. Each
constituency has its own use for the model
• Keep the model as simple as it can be. Don’t create additional diagrams when they add
no new information. Don’t use complex notational forms, when a simple list will do.
Domain Analysis
Domain analysis doesn’t look at a specific application, but rather at the domain in which
the application resides.
The “specific application domain” can range from avionics to banking, from multimedia
video games to software embedded within medical devices. The goal of domain analysis is
straightforward: to identify common problem solving elements that are applicable to all
applications within the domain, to find or create those analysis classes and/or analysis patterns
that are broadly applicable so that they may be reused.
Requirements Modeling Approaches
One view of requirements modeling, called structured analysis, considers data and the
processes that transform the data as separate entities. Data objects are modeled in a way that
defines their attributes and relationships.
A second approach to analysis modeling, called object-oriented analysis, focuses on the
definition of classes and the manner in which they collaborate with one another to effect
customer requirements. UML and the Unified Process are predominantly object oriented.
Each element of the requirements model is represented in following figure presents the
problem from a different point of view.
Scenario-based elements depict how the user interacts with the system and the specific
sequence of activities that occur as the software is used.
Class-based elements model the objects that the system will manipulate, the operations
that will be applied to the objects to effect the manipulation, relationships between the objects,
and the collaborations that occur between the classes that are defined.
 Fig : Elements of the analysis model

Behavioral elements depict how external events change the state of the system or the
classes that reside within it. Finally,
Flow-oriented elements represent the system as an information transform, depicting how
data objects are transformed as they flow through various system functions.

SCENARIO-BASED MODELING
Scenario-based elements depict how the user interacts with the system and the specific
sequence of activities that occur as the software is used.
Creating a Preliminary Use Case
Alistair Cockburn characterizes a use case as a “contract for behavior”, the “contract”
defines the way in which an actor uses a computer-based system to accomplish some goal. In
essence, a use case captures the interactions that occur between producers and consumers of
information and the system itself.
A use case describes a specific usage scenario in straightforward language from the point of
view of a defined actor. These are the questions that must be answered if use cases are to provide
value as a requirements modeling tool. (1) what to write about, (2) how much to write about it,
(3) how detailed to make your description, and (4) how to organize the description?
To begin developing a set of use cases, list the functions or activities performed by a
specific actor.
Refining a Preliminary Use Case
Each step in the primary scenario is evaluated by asking the following questions:
 • Can the actor take some other action at this point?
• Is it possible that the actor will encounter some error condition at this point? If so, what
might it be?
• Is it possible that the actor will encounter some other behavior at this point
(e.g.,behavior that is invoked by some event outside the actor’s control)? If so, what
might it be?
Cockburn recommends using a “brainstorming” session to derive a reasonably complete set of
exceptions for each use case. In addition to the three generic questions suggested earlier in this
section, the following issues should also be explored:
• Are there cases in which some “validation function” occurs during this use case? This
implies that validation function is invoked and a potential error condition might occur.
• Are there cases in which a supporting function (or actor) will fail to respond
appropriately? For example, a user action awaits a response but the function that is to
respond times out.
• Can poor system performance result in unexpected or improper user actions? For
example, a Web-based interface responds too slowly, resulting in a user making multiple
selects on a processing button. These selects queue inappropriately and ultimately
generate an error condition.
Writing a Formal Use Case
The typical outline for formal use cases can be in following manner
• The goal in context identifies the overall scope of the use case.
• The precondition describes what is known to be true before the use case is initiated.
• The trigger identifies the event or condition that “gets the use case started”
• The scenario lists the specific actions that are required by the actor and the appropriate
system responses.
• Exceptions identify the situations uncovered as the preliminary use case is refined
Additional headings may or may not be included and are reasonably self-explanatory.
Every modeling notation has limitations, and the use case is no exception. A use case focuses on
functional and behavioral requirements and is generally inappropriate for nonfunctional
requirements
However, scenario-based modeling is appropriate for a significant majority of all situations that
you will encounter as a software engineer.

Fig : Simple Use Case Diagram

UML MODELS THAT SUPPLEMENT THE USE CASE

Developing an Activity Diagram
The UML activity diagram supplements the use case by providing a graphical representation of
the flow of interaction within a specific scenario. Similar to the flowchart, an activity diagram
uses rounded rectangles to imply a specific system function, arrows to represent flow through the
system, decision diamonds to depict a branching decision (each arrow emanating from the
diamond is labeled), and solid horizontal lines to indicate that parallel activities are occurring. i.e
A UML activity diagram represents the actions and decisions that occur as some function is
performed.
 Fig : Activity Diagram for ATM
Swimlane Diagrams
The UML swimlane diagram is a useful variation of the activity diagram and allows you
to represent the flow of activities described by the use case and at the same time indicate which
actor or analysis class has responsibility for the action described by an activity rectangle.
Responsibilities are represented as parallel segments that divide the diagram vertically, like the
lanes in a swimming pool.
The following figure represents swimlane diagram for ATM
Fig : swimlane diagram for ATM
 DATA MODELING CONCEPTS
Data modeling is the process of documenting a complex software system design as an
easily understood diagram, using text and symbols to represent the way data needs to flow. The
diagram can be used as a blueprint for the construction of new software or for re-engineering a
legacy application. The most widely used data Model by the Software engineers is Entity-
Relationship Diagram (ERD), it addresses the issues and represents all data objects that are
entered, stored, transformed, and produced within an application.
Data Objects
A data object is a representation of composite information that must be understood by
software. A data object can be an external entity (e.g., anything that produces or consumes
information), a thing (e.g., a report or a display), an occurrence (e.g., a telephone call) or event
(e.g., an alarm), a role (e.g., salesperson), an organizational unit (e.g., accounting department),
a place (e.g., a warehouse), or a structure (e.g., a file).
For example, a person or a car can be viewed as a data object in the sense that either can
be defined in terms of a set of attributes. The description of the data object incorporates the data
object and all of its attributes.
A data object encapsulates data only—there is no reference within a data object to
operations that act on the data. Therefore, the data object can be represented as a table as shown
in following table. The headings in the table reflect attributes of the object.

Fig : Tabular representation of data objects

 Data Attributes
Data attributes define the properties of a data object and take on one of three different
characteristics. They can be used to (1) name an instance of the data object, (2) describe the
instance, or (3) make reference to another instance in another table.

Relationships
Data objects are connected to one another in different ways. Consider the two data objects,
person and car. These objects can be represented using the following simple notation and
relationships are 1) A person owns a car, 2) A person is insured to drive a car

Fig : Relationships between data objects

CLASS-BASED MODELING

Class-based modeling represents the objects that the system will manipulate, the
operations that will be applied to the objects to effect the manipulation, relationships between the
objects, and the collaborations that occur between the classes that are defined. The elements of a
class-based model include classes and objects, attributes, operations, class responsibility-
collaborator (CRC) models, collaboration diagrams, and packages.
Identifying Analysis Classes
We can begin to identify classes by examining the usage scenarios developed as part of
the requirements model and performing a “grammatical parse” on the use cases developed for
the system to be built.
Analysis classes manifest themselves in one of the following ways:
• External entities (e.g., other systems, devices, people) that produce or consume
information to be used by a computer-based system.
• Things (e.g., reports, displays, letters, signals) that are part of the information domain for
the problem.
• Occurrences or events (e.g., a property transfer or the completion of a series of robot
movements) that occur within the context of system operation.
• Roles (e.g., manager, engineer, salesperson) played by people who interact with the
system.
• Organizational units (e.g., division, group, team) that are relevant to an application.
• Places (e.g., manufacturing floor or loading dock) that establish the context of the
problem and the overall function of the system.
• Structures (e.g., sensors, four-wheeled vehicles, or computers) that define a class of
objects or related classes of objects.
Coad and Yourdon suggest six selection characteristics that should be used as you consider each
potential class for inclusion in the analysis model:
1. Retained information. The potential class will be useful during analysis only if information
about it must be remembered so that the system can function.
2. Needed services. The potential class must have a set of identifiable operations that can change
the value of its attributes in some way.
3. Multiple attributes. During requirement analysis, the focus should be on “major” information;
a class with a single attribute may, in fact, be useful during design, but is probably better
represented as an attribute of another class during the analysis activity.
4. Common attributes. A set of attributes can be defined for the potential class and these
attributes apply to all instances of the class.
5. Common operations. A set of operations can be defined for the potential class and these
operations apply to all instances of the class.
6. Essential requirements. External entities that appear in the problem space and produce or
consume information essential to the operation of any solution for the system will almost always
be defined as classes in the requirements model.
 .2 Specifying Attributes
Attributes describe a class that has been selected for inclusion in the requirements model.
In essence, it is the attributes that define the class—that clarify what is meant by the class in the
context of the problem space.
To develop a meaningful set of attributes for an analysis class, you should study each use
case and select those “things” that reasonably “belong” to the class.
Defining Operations
Operations define the behavior of an object. Although many different types of operations exist,
they can generally be divided into four broad categories: (1) operations that manipulate data in
some way (e.g., adding, deleting, reformatting, selecting), (2) operations that perform a
computation, (3) operations that inquire about the state of an object, and (4) operations that
monitor an object for the occurrence of a controlling event.

Fig : Class diagram for the system class

Class-Responsibility-Collaborator (CRC) Modeling

Class-responsibility-collaborator (CRC) modeling provides a simple means for
identifying and organizing the classes that are relevant to system or product requirements.
Ambler describes CRC modeling in the following way :
A CRC model is really a collection of standard index cards that represent classes. The
cards are divided into three sections. Along the top of the card you write the name of the class.
In the body of the card you list the class responsibilities on the left and the collaborators on the
right.
The CRC model may make use of actual or virtual index cards. The intent is to develop an
organized representation of classes. Responsibilities are the attributes and operations that are
relevant for the class. i.e., a responsibility is “anything the class knows or does” Collaborators
are those classes that are required to provide a class with the information needed to complete a
responsibility. In general, a collaboration implies either a request for information or a request for
some action. A simple CRC index card is illustrated in following figure.

Fig : A CRC model index card

Classes : The taxonomy of class types can be extended by considering the following categories:
• Entity classes, also called model or business classes, are extracted directly from the
statement of the problem. These classes typically represent things that are to be stored in
a database and persist throughout the duration of the application.
 • Boundary classes are used to create the interface that the user sees and interacts with as
the software is used. Boundary classes are designed with the responsibility of managing
the way entity objects are represented to users.
• Controller classes manage a “unit of work” from start to finish. That is, controller classes
can be designed to manage (1) the creation or update of entity objects, (2) the
instantiation of boundary objects as they obtain information from entity objects, (3)
complex communication between sets of objects, (4) validation of data communicated
between objects or between the user and the application. In general, controller classes are
not considered until the design activity has begun.
Responsibilities : Wirfs-Brock and her colleagues suggest five guidelines for allocating
responsibilities to classes:
1. System intelligence should be distributed across classes to best address the needs of
the problem. Every application encompasses a certain degree of intelligence; that is,
what the system knows and what it can do.
2. Each responsibility should be stated as generally as possible. This guideline implies
that general responsibilities should reside high in the class hierarchy
3. Information and the behavior related to it should reside within the same class. This
achieves the object-oriented principle called encapsulation. Data and the processes that
manipulate the data should be packaged as a cohesive unit.
4. Information about one thing should be localized with a single class, not distributed
across multiple classes. A single class should take on the responsibility for storing and
manipulating a specific type of information. This responsibility should not, in general, be
shared across a number of classes. If information is distributed, software becomes more
difficult to maintain and more challenging to test.
5. Responsibilities should be shared among related classes, when appropriate. There
are many cases in which a variety of related objects must all exhibit the same behavior at the
same time.
Collaborations. Classes fulfill their responsibilities in one of two ways:
1. A class can use its own operations to manipulate its own attributes, thereby fulfilling a
particular responsibility, or
2. A class can collaborate with other classes.
 When a complete CRC model has been developed, stakeholders can review the model using
the following approach :
1. All participants in the review (of the CRC model) are given a subset of the CRC model
index cards. Cards that collaborate should be separated (i.e., no reviewer should have two
cards that collaborate).
2. All use-case scenarios (and corresponding use-case diagrams) should be organized into
categories.
3. The review leader reads the use case deliberately. As the review leader comes to a named
object, she passes a token to the person holding the corresponding class index card.
4. When the token is passed, the holder of the card is asked to describe the responsibilities
noted on the card. The group determines whether one (or more) of the responsibilities
satisfies the use-case requirement.
5. If the responsibilities and collaborations noted on the index cards cannot accommodate
the use case, modifications are made to the cards. This may include the definition of new
classes (and corresponding CRC index cards) or the specification of new or revised
responsibilities or collaborations on existing cards.
Associations and Dependencies
An association defines a relationship between classes. An association may be further defined
by indicating multiplicity. Multiplicity defines how many of one class are related to how many
of another class.
A client-server relationship exists between two analysis classes. In such cases, a client class
depends on the server class in some way and a dependency relationship is established.
Dependencies are defined by a stereotype. A stereotype is an “extensibility mechanism” within
UML that allows you to define a special modeling element whose semantics are custom defined.
In UML. Stereotypes are represented in double angle brackets (e.g., <<stereotype>>).
 Fig : Multiplicity

Fig : Dependencies
Analysis Packages
An important part of analysis modeling is categorization. That is, various elements of the
analysis model (e.g., use cases, analysis classes) are categorized in a manner that packages them
as a grouping—called an analysis package—that is given a representative name.

Fig : Packages
Requirements Modeling (Flow, Behavior, Patterns and WEBAPPS)

REQUIREMENTS MODELING STRATEGIES

One view of requirements modeling, called structured analysis,. Data objects are
modeled in a way that defines their attributes and relationships. Processes that manipulate data
objects are modeled in a manner that shows how they transform data as data objects flow through
the system.
A second approach to analysis modeled, called object-oriented analysis, focuses on the
definition of classes and the manner in which they collaborate with one another to effect
customer requirements.

FLOW-ORIENTED MODELING

Flow-oriented modeling is perceived as an outdated technique by some software

engineers, it continues to be one of the most widely used requirements analysis notations in use
today. The data flow diagram (DFD) is the representation of Flow-oriented modeling. The
purpose of data flow diagrams is to provide a semantic bridge between users and systems
developers.”
The DFD takes an input-process-output view of a system. That is, data objects flow into
the software, are transformed by processing elements, and resultant data objects flow out of the
software. Data objects are represented by labeled arrows, and transformations are represented by
circles (also called bubbles). The DFD is presented in a hierarchical fashion. That is, the first
data flow model (sometimes called a level 0 DFD or context diagram) represents the system as a
whole. Subsequent data flow diagrams refine the context diagram, providing increasing detail
with each subsequent level.
 Fig : Context-level DFD for the Safe Home security function
Creating a Data Flow Model
The data flow diagram enables you to develop models of the information domain and
functional domain. As the DFD is refined into greater levels of detail, you perform an implicit
functional decomposition of the system. At the same time, the DFD refinement results in a
corresponding refinement of data as it moves through the processes that embody the application.
A few simple guidelines can aid immeasurably during the derivation of a data flow
diagram:
(1) The level 0 data flow diagram should depict the software/system as a single bubble;
(2) Primary input and output should be carefully noted;
(3) Refinement should begin by isolating candidate processes, data objects, and data
stores to be represented at the next level;
(4) All arrows and bubbles should be labeled with meaningful names;
(5) Information flow continuity must be maintained from level to level,2 and
(6) One bubble at a time should be refined. There is a natural tendency to overcomplicate
the data flow diagram.
A level 0 DFD for the security function is shown in above figure. The primary external
entities (boxes) produce information for use by the system and consume information generated
by the system. The labeled arrows represent data objects or data object hierarchies.
The level 0 DFD must now be expanded into a level 1 data flow model. you should apply
a “grammatical parse” to the use case narrative that describes the context-level bubble. That is,
isolate all nouns (and noun phrases) and verbs (and verb phrases). The grammatical parse is not
foolproof, but it can provide you with an excellent jump start, if you’re struggling to define data
objects and the transforms that operate on them.
The processes represented at DFD level 1 can be further refined into lower levels. The
refinement of DFDs continues until each bubble performs a simple function. That is, until the
process represented by the bubble performs a function that would be easily implemented as a
program component. a concept, Cohesion can be used to assess the processing focus of a given
function. i.e refine DFDs until each bubble is “single-minded.”

Fig: Level 1 DFD for SafeHome security function

 Fig : Level 2 DFD that refines the monitor sensors process

2.14.2. Creating a Control Flow Model

The data model and the data flow diagram are all that is necessary to obtain meaningful
insight into software requirements. The following guidelines are suggested for creating a Control
Flow Model
• List all sensors that are “read” by the software.
• List all interrupt conditions.
• List all “switches” that are actuated by an operator.
• List all data conditions.
• Recalling the noun/verb parse that was applied to the processing narrative, review all
“control items” as possible control specification inputs/outputs.
• Describe the behavior of a system by identifying its states, identify how each state is
reached, and define the transitions between states.
• Focus on possible omissions—a very common error in specifying control;
 The Control Specification
A control specification (CSPEC) represents the behavior of the system in two different
ways. The CSPEC contains a state diagram that is a sequential specification of behavior. It can
also contain a program activation table—a combinatorial specification of behavior. The
following figure depicts a preliminary state diagram for the level 1 control flow model for
SafeHome. The diagram indicates how the system responds to events as it traverses the four
states defined at this level. By reviewing the state diagram, we can determine the behavior of the
system and, more important, ascertain whether there are “holes” in the specified behavior.
The CSPEC describes the behavior of the system, but it gives us no information about the
inner working of the processes that are activated as a result of this behavior.

Fig : State diagram for SafeHome security function

The Process Specification

The process specification (PSPEC) is used to describe all flow model processes that
appear at the final level of refinement. The content of the process specification can include
narrative text, a program design language (PDL) description of the process algorithm,
mathematical equations, tables, or UML activity diagrams. By providing a PSPEC to accompany
each bubble in the flow model, you can create a “mini-spec” that serves as a guide for design of
the software component that will implement the bubble.

CREATING A BEHAVIORAL MODEL

The behavioral model indicates how software will respond to external events or stimuli.
To create the model, you should perform the following steps:
1. Evaluate all use cases to fully understand the sequence of interaction within the
system.
2. Identify events that drive the interaction sequence and understand how these events
relate to specific objects.
3. Create a sequence for each use case.
4. Build a state diagram for the system.
5. Review the behavioral model to verify accuracy and consistency.
Identifying Events with the Use Case
The use case represents a sequence of activities that involves actors and the system. In
general, an event occurs whenever the system and an actor exchange information. A use case is
examined for points of information exchange. To illustrate, we reconsider the use case for a
portion of the SafeHome security function. The homeowner uses the keypad to key in a four-digit
password. The password is compared with the valid password stored in the system. If the
password is incorrect, the control panel will beep once and reset itself for additional input. If the
password is correct, the control panel awaits further action.
The underlined portions of the use case scenario indicate events. An actor should be
identified for each event; the information that is exchanged should be noted, and any conditions
or constraints should be listed. Once all events have been identified, they are allocated to the
objects involved. Objects can be responsible for generating events .
State Representations
In the context of behavioral modeling, two different characterizations of states must be
considered: (1) the state of each class as the system performs its function and (2) the state of the
system as observed from the outside as the system performs its Function Two different
behavioral representations are discussed in the paragraphs that follow. The first indicates how
an individual class changes state based on external events and the second shows the behavior of
the software as a function of time.
State diagrams for analysis classes. One component of a behavioral model is a UML state
diagram that represents active states for each class and the events (triggers) that cause changes
between these active states. The following figure illustrates a state diagram for the ControlPanel
object in the SafeHome security function. Each arrow shown in figure represents a transition
from one active state of an object to another. The labels shown for each arrow represent the event
that triggers the transition

Fig : State diagram for the Control Panel class

Sequence diagrams. The second type of behavioral representation, called a sequence diagram in
UML, indicates how events cause transitions from object to object. Once events have been
identified by examining a use case, the modeler creates a sequence diagram—a representation of
how events cause flow from one object to another as a function of time. In essence, the sequence
diagram is a shorthand version of the use case. It represents key classes and the events that cause
behavior to flow from class to class.
 Fig : Sequence diagram (partial) for the SafeHome security function

PATTERNS FOR REQUIREMENTS MODELING

Software patterns are a mechanism for capturing domain knowledge in a way that allows
it to be reapplied when a new problem is encountered. In some cases, the domain knowledge is
applied to a new problem within the same application domain. The domain knowledge captured
by a pattern can be applied by analogy to a completely different application domain.
The pattern can be reused when performing requirements modeling for an application
within a domain. Analysis patterns are stored in a repository so that members of the software
team can use search facilities to find and reuse them. Once an appropriate pattern is selected, it
is integrated into the requirements model by reference to the pattern name.
Discovering Analysis Patterns
The requirements model is comprised of a wide variety of elements: scenario-based (use
cases), data-oriented (the data model), class-based, flow-oriented, and behavioral. Each of
these elements examines the problem from a different perspective, and each provides an
opportunity to discover patterns that may occur throughout an application domain, or by analogy,
across different application domains.
The most basic element in the description of a requirements model is the use case. Use
cases may serve as the basis for discovering one or more analysis patterns.
A semantic analysis pattern (SAP) “is a pattern that describes a small set of coherent
use cases that together describe a basic generic application”