Content deleted Content added
→Introduction: Did some research into Allan Albrecht and found his obituary which showed a J. would be a good edit as looking up just his name gave me a few different people. <ref>https://ifpug.org/2010/11/20/allan-j-albrecht</ref> |
Restored revision 1260757152 by 2A0D:3344:1D9:1C10:44C4:6CCD:8314:5D75 (talk): WP:EL |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 14:
* [[Object Management Group|OMG]]: ISO/IEC 19515:2019 Information technology — Object Management Group Automated Function Points (AFP), 1.0
The first five standards are implementations of the over-arching standard for [[Software measurement|Functional Size Measurement]] ISO/IEC 14143.<ref name="ISO/IEC 14143">{{cite web |url=https://www.iso.org/standard/38931.html |title=ISO/IEC 14143 |author=ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 7 Software and systems engineering |date=2007-02-01 |publisher=International Standards Organization |access-date=2019-02-26}}</ref> The OMG Automated Function Point (AFP) specification, led by the [[CISQ|Consortium for IT Software Quality]], provides a standard for automating the Function Point counting according to the guidelines of the International Function Point User Group ([[IFPUG]]) However, the current implementations of this standard have a limitation in being able to distinguish External Output (EO) from External Inquiries (EQ) out of the box, without some upfront configuration.<ref>OMG/CISQ Specification "Automated Function Points", February 2013, OMG Document Number ptc/2013-02-01 http://www.omg.org/spec/AFP/1.0</ref>
== Introduction ==
Line 35:
== Criticism ==
Albrecht observed in his research that Function Points were highly correlated to lines of code,<ref>Albrecht, A. Software Function, Source Lines of Code, and Development Effort Estimation – A Software Science Validation. 1983.</ref> which has resulted in a questioning of the value of such a measure if a more objective measure, namely counting lines of code, is available. In addition, there have been multiple attempts to address perceived shortcomings with the measure by augmenting the counting regimen.<ref>Symons, C.R. "Function point analysis: difficulties and improvements." IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. January 1988. pp. 2-111.</ref><ref>Hemmstra, F. and Kusters R. "Function point analysis: evaluation of a software cost estimation model." European Journal of Information Systems. 1991. Vol 1, No 4. pp 229-237.</ref><ref>Jeffery, R and Stathis, J. "Specification-based software sizing: An empirical investigation of function metrics." Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Software Engineering Workshop. 1993. p 97-115.</ref><ref>Symons, C. Software sizing and estimating: Mk II FPA (Function Point Analysis). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1991</ref><ref>Demarco, T. "An algorithm for sizing software products." ACM Sigmetrics Performance Evaluation Review. 1984. Volume 12, Issue 2. pp 13-22.</ref><ref>Jeffrey, D.R, Low, G.C. and Barnes, M. "A comparison of function point counting techniques." IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1993. Volume 19, Issue 5. pp 529-532.
== See also ==
* [[COCOMO]] (Constructive Cost Model)
* [[Comparison of development estimation software]]
* [[COSMIC functional size measurement]]
* [[MK II FPA|Mark II method]]
* [[Object point]]
Line 53 ⟶ 54:
== External links ==
* [http://www.ifpug.org/ The International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG)]
[[Category:Software metrics]]
| |||