Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:12:13.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effective use of ontologies in software measurement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

Félix García ,
Francisco Ruiz ,
Coral Calero ,
Manuel F. Bertoa ,
Antonio Vallecillo ,
Beatriz Mora  and
Mario Piattini
Félix García
Affiliation:
Alarcos Research Group—Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Department of Information Technologies & Systems—Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. e-mail: Felix.Garcia@uclm.es, Francisco.RuizG@uclm.es, Coral.Calero@uclm.es, Beatriz.Mora@uclm.es, Mario.Piattini@uclm.es
Francisco Ruiz
Affiliation:
Alarcos Research Group—Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Department of Information Technologies & Systems—Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. e-mail: Felix.Garcia@uclm.es, Francisco.RuizG@uclm.es, Coral.Calero@uclm.es, Beatriz.Mora@uclm.es, Mario.Piattini@uclm.es
Coral Calero
Affiliation:
Alarcos Research Group—Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Department of Information Technologies & Systems—Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. e-mail: Felix.Garcia@uclm.es, Francisco.RuizG@uclm.es, Coral.Calero@uclm.es, Beatriz.Mora@uclm.es, Mario.Piattini@uclm.es
Manuel F. Bertoa
Affiliation:
Departamento de Lenguajes y Ciencias de la Computación, Universidad de Málaga. 29071 Málaga, España, Spain. e-mail: bertoa@lcc.uma.es, av@lcc.uma.es
Antonio Vallecillo
Affiliation:
Departamento de Lenguajes y Ciencias de la Computación, Universidad de Málaga. 29071 Málaga, España, Spain. e-mail: bertoa@lcc.uma.es, av@lcc.uma.es
Beatriz Mora
Affiliation:
Alarcos Research Group—Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Department of Information Technologies & Systems—Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. e-mail: Felix.Garcia@uclm.es, Francisco.RuizG@uclm.es, Coral.Calero@uclm.es, Beatriz.Mora@uclm.es, Mario.Piattini@uclm.es
Mario Piattini
Affiliation:
Alarcos Research Group—Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Department of Information Technologies & Systems—Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. e-mail: Felix.Garcia@uclm.es, Francisco.RuizG@uclm.es, Coral.Calero@uclm.es, Beatriz.Mora@uclm.es, Mario.Piattini@uclm.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ontologies are frequently used in the context of software and technology engineering. These can be grouped into two main categories, depending on whether they are used to describe the knowledge of a domain (domain ontologies) or whether they are used as software artifacts in software development processes. This paper presents some experiences and lessons learnt from the effective use of an ontology for Software Measurement, called software measurement ontology (SMO). The SMO was developed some years ago as a result of a thorough analysis of the software measurement domain. Its use as a domain ontology is presented first, a description of how the SMO can serve as a conceptual basis for comparing international standards related to software measurement. Second, the paper describes several examples of the applications of SMO as a software artifact. In particular, we show how the SMO can be instantiated to define a data quality model for Web portals, and also how it can be used to define a Domain-Specific Language (DSL) for measuring software entities. These examples show the significant role that ontologies can play as software artifacts in the realm of model-driven engineering and domain-specific modeling.

Type
Article
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 24 , Special Issue 1: Software and system engineering – part 1 , March 2009 , pp. 23 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Althoff, K., Birk, A., Hartkopf, S., Muller, W. 1999. Managing software engineering experience for comprehensive reuse. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’99). Kaiserslautern, Germany.Google Scholar
Assmann, U., Zschaler, S.Wagner, G. 2006. Ontologies, meta-models, and the model-driven paradigm. In Ontologies for Software Engineering and Technologies, Calero, C., Ruiz, F. & Piattini, M. (eds). Springer-Verlag, 49–102.Google Scholar
Bertoa, M., García, F.Vallecillo, A. 2006. An ontology for software measurement. In Ontologies for Software Engineering and Technologies, Calero, C., Ruiz, F. & Piattini, M. (eds). Springer-Verlag, 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bézivin, J., Jouault, F., Touzet, D. 2005. Principles, standards and tools for model engineering. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS’2005). IEEE Computer Society, Shanghai, China, 28–29.Google Scholar
Caro, C., Calero, C., Piattini, M. 2007. Development of the operational version of PDQM. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE 2007). France.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caro, C., Calero, C., Caballero, I.Piattini, M. 2008. A proposal for a set of attributes relevant for Web portal data quality. Software Quality Journal 16(4), 513–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, M. 2003. Ontology Building: A Survey of Editing Tools. Available at http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/11/06/ontologies.htmlGoogle Scholar
Eclipse Graphical Modeling Framework (GMF). 2007. Available at http://www.eclipse.org/gmf/Google Scholar
García, F., Ruiz, F., Bertoa, M., Calero, C., Genero, M., Olsina, L. A., Martín, M. A., Quer, C., Condori, N., Abrahao, S., Vallecillo, A., Piattini, M. 2004. An Ontology for Software Measurement. Technical report, UCLM DIAB-04-02-2, Computer Science Department, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain.Google Scholar
García, F., Bertoa, M., Calero, C., Vallecillo, A., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M.Genero, M. 2006. Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement. Information and Software Technology 48(8), 631–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, F., Serrano, M., Cruz-Lemus, J., Ruiz, F.Piattini, M. 2007. Managing software process measurement: a metamodel-based approach. Information Sciences 177, 2570–2586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez-Pérez, A. 1998. Knowledge Sharing and Reuse. CRC Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, T. R. 1993. A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2), 199–220.Google Scholar
Guerra, E., de Lara, J.Díaz, P. 2008. Visual specification of measurements and redesigns for domain specific visual languages. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 19(8), 399–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolovos, D. S., Paige, R. F., Kelly, T., Polack, F. A. C. 2006. Requirements for Domain-Specific Languages. In First ECOOP Workshop on Domain-Specific Program Development (ECOOP’06). Nantes, France.Google Scholar
Malak, G., Sahraoui, H., Badri, L.Badri, M. 2006. Modeling Web-based applications quality: a probabilistic approach. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4255, 398–404. Springer.Google Scholar
Mernik, M., Heering, J.Sloane, A. M. 2005. When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Computing Surveys 37(4), 316–344.Google Scholar
Mora, B., García, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., Boronat, A., Gómez, A., Carsí, J., Ramos, I. 2008. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS2008), Volume DISI, Barcelona, Spain, 117–124.Google Scholar
Object Management Group (OMG). 2003. MDA Guide, Version 1.0.1, June 2003. Available at http://www.omg.org/mda/specs.htmGoogle Scholar
Object Management Group (OMG). 2006. Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification, Version 2.0, January 2006. OMG document formal/2006-01-01. Available at http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/06-01-01.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pelechano, V., Albert, M., Javier, M., Carlos, C. 2006. Building tools for model driven development comparing microsoft DSL tools and eclipse modeling plug-ins. In Proceedings of Desarrollo de Software Dirigido por Modelos—DSDM’06. Sitges, Spain.Google Scholar
Ruiz, F.Hilera, J. R. 2006. Using ontologies in software engineering and technology. In Ontologies in Software Engineering and Software Technology, Calero, C., Ruiz, F. & Piattini, M. (eds). Springer-Verlag, 49–102.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J. M., Ledeczi, A., Karsai, G.Nordstrom, G. 2001. The new metamodeling generation. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems, 275–279.Google Scholar
Staab, S., Schnurr, H.Sure, Y. 2001. Knowledge processes and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16(1), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tautz, C., Von Wangenheim, C. 1998. REFSENO: A Representation Formalism for Software Engineering Ontologies. Technical report, N 015.98/E, version 1.1. Fraunhofer IESE.Google Scholar
Uschold, M.Gruninger, M. 1996. Ontologies: principles, methods, and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review 11(2), 93–196.Google Scholar
Wang, R.Strong, D. 1996. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems 12, 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, L.Dasgupta, S. 2005. User satisfaction with Web portals: An empirical Study. In Web Systems Design and Online Consumer Behavior, Gao, Y. (ed.). Idea Group Publishing, 193–205.Google Scholar
Yang, Z., Cai, S., Zhou, Z.Zhou, N. 2004. Development and validation of an instrument to measure user perceived service quality of information presenting Web portals. Information and Management 42, 575–589.Google Scholar