Um Estudo de Mapeamento Sistemático Sobre o Padrão OSLC

Autores

  • Bruno Ferreira Unipampa
  • Rafael Torres
  • Fábio Basso
  • Diego Kreutz
  • Elder Rodrigues
  • Maicon Bernardino
  • Rafael Frantz

Palavras-chave:

Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration, OSLC, Integração de Ferramentas

Resumo

A industria de software investe em ferramentas modernas ao longo de ´todo o ciclo de desenvolvimento de software. No entanto, existem desafios para alcanc¸ar um ambiente integrado de ponta a ponta, como por exemplo estabelecer a rastreabilidade dos artefatos. Para mitigar esses desafios, diversas abordagens foram propostas para integrac¸ao de ferramentas de software. Nesse contexto, o Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC) e um padrão aberto para interoperabilidade de ferramentas, que permite a federac¸ao de dados ao longo do ciclo de vida de aplicac¸oes de Engenharia de Software (ES). Este artigo apresenta um estudo de mapeamento sistematico sobre OSLC, analisando ´59 estudos primarios e abordando questões de integrac¸ ˜ ao.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Aichernig, B. K., Hormaier, K., Lorber, F., Nickovic, D., Schlick, R., Simoneau, D., and ¨

Tiran, S. (2014). Integration of requirements engineering and test-case generation via

oslc. In 2014 14th International Conference on Quality Software, pages 117–126.

Alvarez-Rodr´ıguez, J., Mendieta, R., Vara, J., Fraga, A., and Llorens, J. (2018). Enabling system artefact exchange and selection through a linked data layer. Journal of

Universal Computer Science, 24(11):1536–1560. cited By 1.

Arnould, V. (2018). Using model-driven approach for engineering the system engineering

system. In 2018 13th Annual Conference on System of Systems Engineering (SoSE),

pages 608–614.

Baumgart, A. and Ellen, C. (2014). A recipe for tool interoperability. In 2014 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD), pages 300–308.

Biehl, M., El-Khoury, J., and Torngren, M. (2012). High-level specification and code ¨

generation for service-oriented tool adapters. In 2012 12th International Conference

on Computational Science and Its Applications, pages 35–42.

Biehl, M., Gu, W., and Loiret, F. (2012). Model-based service discovery and orchestration

for oslc services in tool chains. In Brambilla, M., Tokuda, T., and Tolksdorf, R., editors,

Web Engineering, pages 283–290, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Biehl, M., Sosa, J. D., Torngren, M., and D ¨ ´ıaz, O. (2013). Efficient construction of

presentation integration for web-based and desktop development tools. In 2013 IEEE

th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops, pages 697–

Buffoni, L., Pop, A., and Mengist, A. (2017). Traceability and impact analysis in requirement verification. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on EquationBased Object-Oriented Modeling Languages and Tools, EOOLT ’17, pages 95–98,

New York, NY, USA. ACM.

d. Martino, B., Esposito, A., Nacchia, S., and Maisto, S. A. (2016). Towards a uniform

semantic representation of business processes, uml artefacts and software assets. In

10th International Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive

Systems (CISIS), pages 543–548.

El-khoury, J. (2016). Lyo code generator: A model-based code generator for the development of oslc-compliant tool interfaces. SoftwareX, 5:190 – 194.

El-Khoury, J., Ekelin, C., and Ekholm, C. (2016). Supporting the linked data approach to

maintain coherence across rich emf models. In Wasowski, A. and Lonn, H., editors, ¨

Modelling Foundations and Applications, pages 36–47, Cham. Springer International

Publishing.Fitzgerald, B. and Stol, K.-J. (2017). Continuous software engineering: A roadmap and

agenda. Journal of Systems and Software, 123:176–189.

Gallina, B., Padira, K., and Nyberg, M. (2016). Towards an iso 26262-compliant oslcbased tool chain enabling continuous self-assessment. In 2016 10th International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC),

pages 199–204.

Gotel, O. and Mader, P. (2012). ¨ Acquiring Tool Support for Traceability, pages 43–68.

Springer London, London.

Gurd ¨ ur, D., Feljan], A. V., El-khoury, J., Mohalik], S. K., Badrinath, R., Mujumdar], ¨

A. P., and Fersman, E. (2018). Knowledge representation of cyber-physical systems

for monitoring purpose. Procedia CIRP, 72:468 – 473. 51st CIRP Conference on

Manufacturing Systems.

Lu, J., W ang, J., Chen, D., Wang, J., and ToRngren, M. (2018). A service-oriented tool- ¨

chain for model-based systems engineering of aero-engines. IEEE Access, 6:50443–

Mikkonen, T. and Taivalsaari, A. (2019). Software reuse in the era of opportunistic design.

IEEE Software, 36(3):105–111.

Mustafa, N. and Labiche, Y. (2017). Employing linked data in building a trace links

taxonomy. pages 186–198. cited By 2.

OSLC (2020). Open services for lifecycle collaboration primer web page. Accessed at

February 2020.

Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., and Kuzniarz, L. (2015). Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software

Technology, 64:1 – 18.

Regan, G., Biro, M., Flood, D., and McCaffery, F. (2015). Assessing traceability - practical experiences and lessons learned. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process,

(8):591–601. cited By 6.

Regan, G., Biro, M., Mc Caffery, F., Mc Daid, K., and Flood, D. (2014). A traceability

process assessment model for the medical device domain. In Barafort, B., O’Connor,

R. V., Poth, A., and Messnarz, R., editors, Systems, Software and Services Process

Improvement, pages 206–216, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Thomas, I. and Nejmeh, B. A. (1992). Definitions of tool integration for environments.

IEEE Software, 9(2):29–35.

Tuz¨ un, E., Tekinerdogan, B., Macit, Y., and ¨

˙Ince, K. (2019). Adopting integrated application lifecycle management within a large-scale software company: An action research

approach. Journal of Systems and Software, 149:63 – 82.

VanZandt, L. (2015). Enabling rational decision making with provenance-annotated oslc

relationships. In 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering (ISSE),

pages 346–352.

Wicks, M. N. and Dewar, R. G. (2007). Controversy corner: A new research agenda for

tool integration. J. Syst. Softw., 80(9):1569–1585.Wieringa, R., Maiden, N., Mead, N., and Rolland, C. (2005). Requirements engineering

paper classification and evaluation criteria: A proposal and a discussion. Requir. Eng.,

(1):102–107.

Zhang, W. and Møller-Pedersen, B. (2013). Establishing tool chains above the service

cloud with integration models. In 2013 IEEE 20th International Conference on Web

Services, pages 372–379.

Zhang, W. and Møller-Pedersen, B. (2014). Modeling of tool integration resources with

oslc support. In 2014 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and

Software Development (MODELSWARD), pages 99–110

Downloads

Data de publicação

2021-09-04

Como Citar

Ferreira, B., Torres, R., Basso, F., Kreutz, D., Rodrigues, E., Bernardino, M. ., & Frantz, R. (2021). Um Estudo de Mapeamento Sistemático Sobre o Padrão OSLC. Revista Eletrônica De Iniciação Científica Em Computação, 19(3). Recuperado de https://journals-sol.sbc.org.br/index.php/reic/article/view/1905

Edição

Seção

Artigos