Uri Dekel
James D. Herbsleb
Abstract
Software designers in the object-oriented paradigm can make use of modeling tools and standard notations such as UML. Nevertheless, casual observations from collocated design collaborations suggest that teams tend to use physical mediums to sketch a plethora of informal diagrams in varied representations that often diverge from UML. To better understand such collaborations and support them with tools, we need to understand the origins, roles, uses, and implications of these alternate representations. To this end we conducted observational studies of collaborative design exercises, in which we focused on representation use.
Our primary finding is that teams intentionally improviserepresentations and organize design information in responseto ad-hoc needs, which arise from the evolution of the design, and which are difficult to meet with fixed standard notations. This behavior incurs orientation and grounding difficulties for which teams compensate by relying on memory, other communication mediums, and contextual cues. Without this additional information the artifacts are difficult to interpret and have limited documentation potential. Collaborative design tools and processes should therefore focus on preserving contextual information while permitting unconstrained mixing and improvising of notations.
- S. W. Ambler. The Object Primer - Agile Model-Driven Development with UML 2.0. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Black. Visible planning on paper and on screen: The impact of working medium on decision-making by novice graphic designer. Behaviour and Information Technology, 9(4):283--296, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- . Boulila. Group support for distributed collaborative concurrent software modeling. In ASE'04, pages 422--425. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. C. Briand, Y. Labiche, M. D. Penta, and H. D. Yan-Bondoc. An experimental investigation of formality in UML-based development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(10):833--849, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Q. Chen, J. Grundy, and J. Hosking. An e-whiteboard application to support early design-stage sketching of UML diagrams. In IEEE Conference on Human-Centric Computing (HCC'03), 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Cherubini, G. Venolia, R. DeLine, and A. J. Ko. Let's go to the whiteboard: how and why software developers use drawings. In CHI '07, pages 557--566. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Creighton, M. Ott, and B. Bruegge. Software cinemavideo-based requirements engineering. In RE'06, pages 106--115. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. H. Damm, K. M. Hansen, and M. Thomsen. Tool support for cooperative Object-Oriented design: gesture based modelling on an electronic whiteboard. In CHI'00, pages 518--525. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. H. Damm, K. M. Hansen, M. Thomsen, and M. Tyrsted. Supporting several levels of restriction in the UML. In UML'00, LNCS 2844, pages 396--409. Springer, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- U. Dekel. Supporting distributed software design meetings: what can we learn from co-located meetings? In Workshop on Human and Social Factors of Software Engineering (HSSE) at ICSE'05, SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes, 30(4):1--7, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- ACM DesignFest homepage. http://designfest.acm.org.Google Scholar
- S. Elrod et al. Liveboard: a large interactive display supporting group meetings, presentations, and remote collaboration. In CHI'92, pages 599--607. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. W. Furnas and B. B. Bederson. Space-scale diagrams: understanding multiscale interfaces. In CHI'95, pages 234--241. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Gil and S. Kent. Three dimensional software modelling. In ICSE'98, pages 105--114. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Grundy and J. Hosking. Supporting generic sketchingbased input of diagrams in a domain-specific visual language meta-tool. In ICSE'07, pages 282--291. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. D. Herbsleb, H. A. Klein, G. Olson, H. Brunner, J. Olson, and J. Harding. Object-oriented analysis and design in software project teams. Human--Computer Interaction, 10(2):249--292, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. R. Klemmer et al. The designers' outpost: a tangible interface for collaborative web site. In UIST'01, pages 1--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Ko, R. DeLine, and G. Venolia. Information needs in collocated software development teams. In ICSE'07, pages 344--353. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. F. J. Lange and M. R. V. Chaudron. Effects of defects in UML models: an experimental investigation. In ICSE'06, pages 401--411. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. D. LaToza, G. Venolia, and R. DeLine. Maintaining mental models: a study of developer work habits. In ICSE'06, pages 492--501. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Lin, M. W. Newman, J. I. Hong, and J. A. Landay. Denim: finding a tighter fit between tools and practice for web site design. In CHI'00, pages 510--517. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Mehra, J. Grundy, and J. Hosking. Supporting collaborative software design with a plug-in, web services-based architecture. In Workshop on Directions in Software Engineering Environments (WoDiSEE) at ICSE'04. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Object Management Group. UML 2.0 specification.Google Scholar
- B. Plimmer and M. Apperley. Interacting with sketched interface designs: an evaluation study. In CHI'04, pages 1337--1340. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. L. Schacter and E. Tulving. What are the memory systems of 1994? In D. L. Schacter and E. Tulving, editors, Memory Systems, pages 2--38. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.Google Scholar
- S. Tilley and S. Huang. A qualitative assessment of the efficacy of UML diagrams as a form of graphical documentation in aiding program understanding. In SIGDOC'03, pages 184--191. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Visser. Designing as construction of representations: A dynamic viewpoint in cognitive design research. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(1):103--152, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Wu, T. Graham, and P. Smith. A study of collaboration in software design. In 2003 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE'03). IEEE Computer Society, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Wu and T. C. N. Graham. The software design board: A tool supporting workstyle transitions in collaborative software design. In LNCS 2844, pages 92--106. Springer, 2004.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Notation and representation in collaborative object-oriented design: an observational study
Recommendations
Notation and representation in collaborative object-oriented design: an observational study
OOPSLA '07: Proceedings of the 22nd annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages and applicationsSoftware designers in the object-oriented paradigm can make use of modeling tools and standard notations such as UML. Nevertheless, casual observations from collocated design collaborations suggest that teams tend to use physical mediums to sketch a ...
UML Everywhere
A standardized and widely used diagramming notation is a sign of a profession's maturity. Yet in software engineering, we still use diverse and ad hoc notations. Here, the author proposes that engineers should put their differences aside and make a ...
Reusing metamodels and notation with Diagram Definition
It is increasingly common for language specifications to describe visual forms (concrete syntax) separately from underlying concepts (abstract syntax). This is typically to enable interchange of visual information between graphical modeling tools, such ...
Comments