2. THE METHODOLOGY OF THE OBJECT ORIENTED MODELL<strong>IN</strong>G OF <strong>IN</strong>-FORMATION TECHNOLOGY <strong>SYSTEMS</strong>The object-oriented attitude towards designing in comparison with the structuralmethodology enables creating large and complex information technologysystems by numerous teams. According to authors of works: [Wrycza S. andothers.], [Subieta K.], [Dolińska M.] and [Kisielnicki J., Sroka H.] it is popular andit dominates in practice. In 1989-1994 the object-oriented attitude was characterizedby numerous methodologies and notations. The cooperation of three authors:J. Rumbaugh, G., Booch (1995) and I. Jacobson (1996) resulted in the constructionof UML prototype, the unified modelling language of technology information systems,which was at first marked with UM (Unified Method).In practice, UML language has adopted the form of graphic representation ofconstructed system. It consists of connected diagrams in a logic way which enablessystem description from general models to very detailed models. Works of the tramcreated of three scientists [Booch G., Jacobson I., Rumbaugh J.] on UML language,were directed towards the standardisation of the object-oriented system designingand resulted in USDP generic methodology (Unified Software DevelopmentProcess) in 1998. The term generic means in this case a possibility of forming itsvarious configurations and implementation. [Wrycza S. and others, p. 319] Thismethodology is a set of terms and directives and it is directed towards modellingcases of use and towards concentration on system architecture as the main issue inthe process of software designing. The main process assumption is its iterative andincremental character.USDP implementation is RUP methodology (Rational Unified Process)[Kruchten P.] [IBM, Rational Unified…] that was designed by Rational Software.It dominates in the area of formal, object-oriented methodology of creating systemscompliant with the notation of UML language and it is a competitive solution forOPEN methodology (Object-oriented Process, Environment, and Notation) whichwas created as a result of combining over twenty international methodologies andtheir ideas (e.g.: MOSES, SOMA, Firesmith and Synthesis, BON, OOram, UML).[Henderson-Sellers B.]Among other object-oriented methods, which are currently being developedand which are also based on the assumptions of USDP generic methodology, wemay distinguish: XP (eXtreme Programming) [Jeffries R.] [Kaczmarski K.],AM (Agile Modeling) [Ambler S.], DSDM (Dynamic Systems DevelopmentMethod) [Davies R.], FDD (Feature Driven Development) [Rybus R.], Scrum[Scrum Alliance, What…], Crystal [Cocburn Alistair A. R.]. They are assigned tothe group of light methodology and are called agile methodology because of thetime limit for modelling and documenting analytical-design works in order to leadquick creation of the system source code. First of all, USDP methodology wasmainly used by the iterative and incremental system lifecycle as well as by model-8
ling categories of UML language. The deft reaction to changes is their featurewhich results from good communication in the team and the whole processadaptation to changeable conditions. Their most important product is working andtested system code.The agile methodology must be reinforced in the sphere of practice. Largescaleundertakings of information technology, which are connected with largecomplex systems (developed and modified for many years), require such methodologyof project running which accurately reflects and defines every process elementof software creation (such as RUP methodology). Using formal (hard)methodology in this case is necessary just because of the scale and potential durationof the project. It is to provide security for the undertaking and achieveintended aims. It can be thought with a real change that in the near future the professionallevel will increase among proponents of light methodology. [Bartyzel M.]It will handle great undertakings provided that they provide a higher control levelover work on the project in every moment of its duration without losing its agileactivity.3. FUNCTIONALITY COMPARISION OF CHOSEN CASE TOOLSUML language has got considerable support in a form of CASE tools[Malina W., Szwoch M.] which provide help in modelling and creating suitableproject documentation. Among the most important functions that prove the advancedposition of a particular CASE tool and provide a suitable control levelwhich meets user’s requirements in the project we may distinguish: data dictionary(repository of metadata with the management system), graphic notations editor(diagrams editor), correctness control module (searching mistakes in diagrams andrepositories), project quality evaluation module (e.g. complexity scale evaluationand evaluation of connections between project elements), generators of reports andtechnical documentation, source code generators, user’s interface designing module,reverse engineering module (possibility of displaying data dictionary or diagramson the basis of the source code or data base structure), import and exportmodule of data as well as group work management module. [Chmielarz W.][Bednarczyk M.]Introducing 2.0 version of UML language caused the necessity of developingCASE tools. Currently many programs support this version, however, there is awide range of solutions, especially non-commercial, which stayed in the standard1.4 UML.In the comparison there were qualified solutions available and spread in thelocal (academic) environment. Among commercial CASE tools there were chosenthe following: Enterprise Architect (version 7.1) enterprises Sparx System[Sparx System, Enterprise…], Poseidon for UML (version 6.0.2) enterprises9
- Page 1 and 2: WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES
- Page 3 and 4: PREFACEThe role of the various info
- Page 5: TABLE OF CONTENTSBECKER J.COMPARATI
- Page 10 and 11: Gentleware [Gentleware, Poseidon…
- Page 12 and 13: The first category of the comparati
- Page 14 and 15: 5. CONCLUSIONSCalculated weighted s
- Page 16 and 17: 14. Kaczmarski K. (2003), Extreme p
- Page 18 and 19: Figure 1. Development of controllin
- Page 20 and 21: 2. THE CHARACTERISTIC OF CORPORATE
- Page 22 and 23: They support formal strategy manage
- Page 24 and 25: SAS Strategy Performance Management
- Page 26 and 27: 4. CONCLUSIONDespite the fact that
- Page 28 and 29: LOGISTICS IN INFORMATION SYSTEMSKrz
- Page 30 and 31: work required to move and position
- Page 32 and 33: Today the information flow within t
- Page 34 and 35: ponents, store them, transport them
- Page 36 and 37: tions depend on the type of operati
- Page 38 and 39: members of the project can easily s
- Page 40 and 41: Figure 4 Evolution of ERP.Source: O
- Page 42 and 43: ments planning, and the execution s
- Page 44 and 45: company to fulfill customer needs),
- Page 46 and 47: DATA WAREHOUSE DESIGNWłodzimierz K
- Page 48 and 49: In the upper layer local data wareh
- Page 50 and 51: In the top-down design data warehou
- Page 52 and 53: Processes should form a hierarchy a
- Page 54 and 55: Oracle Warehouse Builder (OWB) is a
- Page 56 and 57: BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS - IMP
- Page 58 and 59:
a. Primary purpose of operational s
- Page 60 and 61:
a. Multiple data marts and warehous
- Page 62 and 63:
5. THE BI SYSTEM COSTIn this chapte
- Page 64 and 65:
BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING - METHODS
- Page 66 and 67:
The (Rational) Unified Process is o
- Page 68 and 69:
was to be designed user-friendly fo
- Page 70 and 71:
architects and software engineers t
- Page 72 and 73:
THE SELECTION PHASE IN DECISION MAK
- Page 74 and 75:
Figure 1. Decision support system f
- Page 76 and 77:
decision levels.Most of the transpo
- Page 78 and 79:
Figure 4. The fuzzy expert system a
- Page 80 and 81:
5. CONCLUSIONSThe proposed system s
- Page 82 and 83:
XML namespaces, XML Schema, XQuery,
- Page 84 and 85:
SELECT XMLQuery('XQuery' PASSING XM
- Page 86 and 87:
Table 2. Results of Example 2.40000
- Page 88 and 89:
Table 5. Results of Example 5.40000
- Page 90 and 91:
8. XML Feeds of Current Weather Con
- Page 92 and 93:
2. STORAGE OF NATIVE XML DATAThere
- Page 94 and 95:
• a path index, which indexes the
- Page 96 and 97:
tional data is not very difficult i
- Page 98 and 99:
One of possibility of integration o
- Page 100 and 101:
DATA COMLETNESS ESTIMATION INMANAGE
- Page 102 and 103:
tion. Completeness level of a given
- Page 104 and 105:
Figure 1. Data volume observed duri
- Page 106 and 107:
Table 3. Classification matrix for