Functional software architecture: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Conclusion: remove (hard to read and not approp to an enc. article)
m Modeling the business: delink because link later when explain, change ** to * for bullets
Line 34:
Within the area of enterprise engineering formal methodologies, methods and techniques are designed, tested and extensively used in order to offer organizations reusable business process solutions:
 
**Computer Integrated Manufacturing Open Systems Architecture (CIMOSA) methodology [3]
**Integrated DEFinition (IDEF) methodology [4]
**[[Petri Nets]] [5]
**Unified Modeling Language (UML) or Unified Enterprise Modeling Language (UEML) [6,7]
**Enterprise Function Diagrams (EFD)
 
These methodologies/techniques and methods are all more or less suited in modeling the enterprise and its underlying processes. So, which of them are suited for the further development of Information Technology systems that are needed for effective and efficient (re)designed processes? More important, why using a time consuming enterprise methodology when information and software engineers can’t or won’t use the unclear results in the development of efficiency enabling IT systems? Before we can give the answers to these questions some short descriptions of the listed methods above are given.
Line 68:
 
EFD possibly could be used as a business front-end to a software modeling language like UML. The major resemblance with IDEF as a modeling tool indicates that it can be done. However, more research is needed to improve the EFD technique in such a way that formal mappings to UML can be made. Work of Kim et. al. [1] about the complementary use of IDEF and UML has contributed to the acceptance of IDEF as business-front end. A similar study should be done with EFD and UML.
 
 
 
==References==