Frame Counting Agenda

0 downloads 121 Views 80KB Size Report
3.e Determine functional complexity for transactional function. 3.f Determine ... A lexical or a display domain can only
A

Requirements Sizing Method

Name:

Counting Procedure

Input:

· FUR::={requirement statement(s)} · Functional Size Measurement Patterns, such as Problem Frames in Table 2 · Data function complexity and size tables, in ISO/IEC 20926:2009 [16, A.1 and A.2, page 23] · Transactional function complexity and size tables, in ISO/IEC 20926:2009 [16, A.3–A.5, page 23]

Activities: 1. Classify FUR by Problem Frames. 2. Determine Data Functions. 2.a Identify problem domains as data functions. 2.b Classify data functions into ILF or EIF. 2.c Count DET for each data function. 2.d Count RET for each data function. 2.e Determine functional complexity for data functions. 2.f Determine functional size for data functions. 3. Determine Transactional Function. 3.a Identify machine domain as transactional function. 3.b Classify transactional function as either EI, EQ, or EO. 3.c Count FTR for transactional function. 3.d Count DET for transactional function. 3.e Determine functional complexity for transactional function. 3.f Determine functional size for transactional function. 4. Report Functional Size for FUR. Output:

· Subproblem given as problem diagram, and its size in function points

Validation: · continued in section C on page 12 Table 4. Frame Counting Agenda

B

Acronyms

AB DET DF EI EIF EQ EO

Application Boundary Data Element Type Data Function External Input External Interface File External Inquiry External Output

FTR FUR ILF PD PF RET TF

11

File Type Referenced Functional User Requirement Internal Logical File Problem Domain Problem Frame Record Element Type Transactional Function

C

Requirements Sizing Method, Validation Conditions

Validation:

Activity 1. V.i These validation conditions apply to the consideration of a single subproblem, i.e. problem diagram. V.ii A problem frames with only one constrained problem domain and at least one referenced problem domain has been applied to set up the problem diagram. V.iii Only shared phenomena at the machine interface of the problem diagram are considered.

Activity 2.a V.iv A problem domain with symbolic phenomena can take the role of a data function, i.e. an ILF or an EIF. V.v A problem domain with no symbolic phenomena cannot take the role of a data function, i.e. an ILF or an EIF. Activity 2.b V.vi A constrained domain can only take the role of an ILF. V.vii A referenced domain can either take the role of an ILF or an EIF. V.viii A causal domain can either take the role of an ILF or an EIF. V.ix A biddable domain can only take the role of an EIF. V.x A lexical or a display domain can only take the role of an ILF.

Activity 2.c V.xi The number of DET counted for a DF corresponds to its symbolic phenomena. Activity 2.d V.xii The number of RET counted for a DF is one (1).

12

Validation:

Activity 2.e V.xiii The DET for all n data functions Pn classified as ILF in this subproblem is cumulated to ILFDET = i=1 DETILF i . V.xiv The DET for all m data functions as EIF in this subprobPclassified m lem is cumulated to EIFDET = i=1 DETEIF i . V.xv If two problem domains, one is an ILF and the other an EIF, share the same set of k symbolic phenomena, then the respective k DET are only counted for the ILF. The EIFDET is decremented by the respective number of DET, i.e. EIFDET − k. V.xvi If two problem domains, both ILF, share the same set of l symbolic phenomena, then the respective l DET are only counted for the ILF that corresponds to a constrained problem domain. The ILFDET is decremented by the respective number of DET, i.e. ILFDET − l. V.xvii The RET for all n data functions Pn classified as ILF in this subproblem is cumulated to ILFRET = i=1 RETILF i . V.xviii The RET for all m data functions as EIF in this subprobPclassified m lem is cumulated to EIFRET = i=1 RETEIF i . V.xix If ILFRET , ILFDET , EIFRET , or EIFDET is zero (0), associating a DF functional complexity level is not applicable. In this case, the respective ILF or EIF complexity level becomes ILF |EIFComplexity ::={n/a}. V.xx The DF functional complexity for all ILF in this subproblem is determined by ILFComplexity (ILFRET ,ILFDET )::={low|average|high} according to Table A.1 in ISO/IEC 20926. V.xxi The DF functional complexity for all EIF in this subproblem is determined by EIFComplexity (EIFRET ,EIFDET )::={low|average|high} according to Table A.1 in ISO/IEC 20926. Activity 2.f V.xxii If no DF functional complexity ILF/EIFComplexity ={n/a} is applied, the respective DF functional size ILF/EIFSize is considered as zero (0) function points. V.xxiii The DF functional size for all ILF in this subproblem is given in function points and determined by ILFSize (ILFComplexity , ILF ). according to Table A.2 in ISO/IEC 20926. V.xxiv The DF functional size for all EIF in this subproblem is given in function points and determined by EIFSize (EIFComplexity , EIF ). according to Table A.2 in ISO/IEC 20926.

13

Validation:

Activity 3.b V.xxv The classification of the transactional function TFT ype ::={EI|EQ|EO} is justified by the applied problem frame, and aligned with Activity 1., validation condition V.ii. Activity 3.c V.xxvi The number of FTR counted for a TF corresponds to the number of DFs in this subproblem: T FF T R = n ILF + m EIF. Activity 3.d V.xxvii The number of DET counted for a TF corresponds to its shared, symbolic as well as causal phenomena. V.xxviii Shared phenomena with a lexical domain do not cross the application boundary. They do not count in T FDET . V.xxix Shared phenomena with a causal, biddable or display domain do cross the application boundary. They count in T FDET . V.xxx Each causal phenomenon that crosses the application boundary adds one (1) DET for the data element types of a transactional function T FDET , i.e. T FDET ++. V.xxxi Each symbolic phenomenon that crosses the application boundary adds one (1) DET for the data element types of a transactional function T FDET , i.e. T FDET ++. Activity 3.e V.xxxii The TF functional complexity in this subproblem is determined by T FComplexity (T FT ype , T FF T R , T FDET )::={low|average|high} according to the Table A.3 for EI, or A.4 for EO and EQ in ISO/IEC 20926. Activity 3.f V.xxxiii The TF functional size in this subproblem is given in function points and determined by T FSize (T FComplexity , T FT ype ) according to Table A.5 in ISO/IEC 20926. Activity 4. V.xxxiv The functional size for a subproblem is reported in function points. It is a cumulated value of DF and TF sizes in this subproblem given in function points: Subproblemsize = ILFSize + EIFSize + T FSize . Table 5: Frame Counting Agenda, Validation Conditions

14

D



Function Points Validation Condition





FUR02 is a “simple workpieces” problem

2., 2.a –

Candidate

Candidate Data

P D1 : Data Function, P D2 : Data Function

V.iv

2.b

– –

referenced biddable

constrained lexical

P D1 : EIF, P D2 : ILF

P D1 : V.vii, P D2 : V.vi P D1 : V.ix, P D2 : V.x

2.c



FormData1..40

FormData1..40

P D1 : 40 DET, P D2 : 40 DET

V.xi

2.d



1 DF

1 DF

P D1 : 1 RET, P D2 : 1 RET

V.xii

2.e

– – – –

EIFDET = 0, ILFDET = 40 EIFRET = 1, ILFRET = 1 EIFComplexity (EIFRET , EIFDET ) = (1, 0)={n/a} ILFComplexity (ILFRET , ILFDET ) = (1, 40)={low}

V.xiv;V.xv, V.xiii V.xviii, V.xvii EIFComplexity : V.xix ILFComplexity : V.xx

2.f

– –

EIFSize (EIFComplexity ) = EIFSize ({n/a})= ILFSize (ILFComplexity ) = ILFSize ({low})=

1.

15

3. – 3.b Collect Data

V.i, V.ii, V.iii

0 Function Points EIFSize : V.xxii 7 Function Points ILFSize : V.xxiii

Machine Domain: Transactional Function FUR02 is classified as External Input, T FT ype ={EI}

V.xxv

T FF T R = 2

V.xxii

3.c

see 2.d

see 2.d

3.d

symbolic: see 2.c, 40 DET causal: fillIn40FormData, 1 DET

symbolic:see 2.c, shared phenomena that count in T FDET : 40 DET 40 DET causal: causal phenomena that count in T FDET : 1 DET store40FormData, 1 DET T FDET = 41 phenomena cross application boundary

3.e

T FComplexity (T FT ype , T FF T R , T FDET ) = ({EI}, 2, 41)={high}

3.f

T FSize (T FComplexity , T FT ype ) = T FSize ({high}, {EI})=

4.

SubproblemSize = ILFSize + EIFSize + T FSize =7+0+6=

V.xxvii P D1 :V.xxix,P D2 :V.xxviii V.xxvii P D1 :V.xxix,P D2 :V.xxviii V.xxx,V.xxxi V.xxxii 6 Function Points V.xxxiii 13 Function Points V.xxxiv

Step-by-Step Guide to Requirements Sizing Method

Activity Machine Domain Problem Domain1 Problem Domain2 Measurement Process for the Subproblem

E

ISO/IEC 20926:2009 Complexity and Size Tables

E.1

Data Function Complexity Matrix DETs 1-19 20-50 >50 1 Low Low Average RETs 2-5 Low Average High >5 Average High High

Table 6. Data function complexity matrix, taken from [16, table A.1, page 23]

E.2

Data Function Size Matrix Type ILF EIF Low 7 5 Functional Complexity Average 10 7 High 15 10

Table 7. Data function size matrix, taken from [16, table A.2, page 23]

E.3

Transactional Function Complexity Matrix DETs 1-4 5-15 >15 0-1 Low Low Average FTRs 2 Low Average High >2 Average High High

Table 8. EI functional complexity matrix, taken from [16, table A.3, page 23]

DETs 1-5 6-19 >19 0-1 Low Low Average FTRs 2-3 Low Average High >3 Average High High NOTE: An EQ has a minimum of 1 FTR.

Table 9. EO and EQ functional complexity matrix, taken from [16, table A.4, page 23]

E.4

Transactional Function Size Matrix EI Low 3 Functional Complexity Average 4 High 6

Type EO EQ 4 3 5 4 7 6

Table 10. Transactional function size matrix, taken from [16, table A.5, page 23]

16