Thoroughly updated and revised, the second edition of a popular tutorial on how to apply use cases effectively in determining requirements.
3 Signs You Shouldn’t Be Writing a Use Case
This book describes how to gather and define software requirements using a process based on use cases. It shows systems analysts and designers how use cases can provide solutions to the most challenging requirements issues, resulting in effective, quality systems that meet the needs of users. Use Cases, Second Edition: Requirements in Context describes a three-step method for establishing requirements—an iterative process that produces increasingly refined requirements.
Drawing on their extensive, real-world experience, the authors offer a wealth of advice on use-case driven lifecycles, planning for change, and keeping on track. In addition, they include numerous detailed examples to illustrate practical applications. This second edition incorporates the many advancements in use case methodology that have occurred over the past few years. Specifically, this new edition features major changes to the methodology's iterations, and the section on management reflects the faster-paced, more "chaordic" software lifecycles prominent today.
In addition, the authors have included a new chapter on use case traceability issues and have revised the appendixes to show more clearly how use cases evolve.
Here’s the Team
It explains how use cases reduce the incidence of duplicate and inconsistent requirements, and how they facilitate the documentation process and communication among stakeholders. The book also highlights numerous currently available tools, including use case name filters, the context matrix, user interface requirements, and the authors' own "hierarchy killer. Download the Sample Chapter related to this title.
Preface to the First Edition. The Trouble with Requirements. First and Least of All. It has been an interesting three years since the first edition of this book was published. At that time, use cases were still an "interesting technique" but had not been widely adopted. Today, we see a software development marketplace where use cases are the standard practice for gathering requirements and have even migrated to other applications, including business processes, service offerings.
We would not have predicted this wave of popularity in our happiest visions. Of course, our book was not the only one in the last few years to proselytize use cases. But it has been gratifying to be part of this new technique's recognition in the software world. Given this trend, we've decided to publish a second edition of Use Cases: Requirements in Context , putting together the lessons we've learned since our original thoughts.
- Mad Scientist Journal: Spring 2013?
- Erics Girls - A Story of New Amsterdam (Gladys Malvern Classics Book 12)?
- An End to Suffering: The Buddha in the World.
- #1 – Use Cases Can Document Existing Software Functionality!
And the lessons have been many. Our approach in the first edition was something we had created after several use case driven project efforts, but it was still a young process. Using it on many more projects since the book was published, we have had a chance to collaborate with the many of best minds in the software business and fine tune the process into something much workable, practical and scaleable.
Presentation on theme: "Writing Use Cases: Requirements in Context"— Presentation transcript:
We have also taken ideas from other emerging fields, including the ideas of chaordic organizations Dee Hock, Margaret Wheatley and others as well as Drs. Both bodies of work have had a tremendous impact on how we've applied use cases on our projects and how we've recast our ideas in this new edition. In our second edition, you can expect these changes. First and most noticeably, we have only three "F" iterations this time - Facade, Filled and Focused. The last F Finished has proven troublesome on one project after another.
First of all, in an iterative approach, nothing is every truly finished. It is always evolving. Also, as an iteration, it really contained only the mesh between use cases and the user interface design. We have moved the user interface ideas into the Facade iteration, because the evolution of the user interface should proceed in parallel with the early use case creation, not following. Another big change is our approach to our Management chapter. We believe this area of the lifecycle requires the most work of anything, since the waterfall project management processes from years past are not keeping up with the faster pace, more "chaordic" software lifecycles of today.
We present our chapter on management here, but we eagerly look forward to other authors expanding on these ideas and inventing new ways of tackling this big problem. Also, the Project Management Institute PMI have made some gestures toward embracing some of the new software lifecycle ideas. The appendixes in our first edition were regarded by many readers we heard from as the best and the worst parts of the book. We were the first to try to show partially complete use cases in our examples, which is a crucial step to understanding the iterative nature of use case creation.
However, the presentation was quite confusing, because we repeated use cases through the four iterations, sometimes they changed, sometimes they didn't, and it was hard to tell what changed when it did. This time we're taking a very different approach. We still want to tell the story of how use cases are applied to software requirements gathering, but we're doing it in a much less formal way.
In each appendix, we've picked a style of application large business application, technical subsystem, package evaluation, etc. We hope this will retain the good aspects of the first edition, but add some coherence to the evolution of use case versions. We've found on many, many projects that the idea of use case hierarchies does nothing but add confusion. Creating use cases that are "high level" and then "detailed" use cases later is hurting the requirements process.
- Understanding Use Cases - IHRIS Wiki.
- Stay ahead with the world's most comprehensive technology and business learning platform.?
- Hook, The: Corpses in the Cellar - #5.
- CORE Online Help - Use Case Diagram!
- Artifact: Business Use-Case Realization.
- The Muddy Girls Gang (Ginger Hollister Book 2).
- Sleep Dancing With Death! - Struggling With Sleep Apnea.
Hierarchies that are taller and more complex some books advocate four-level hierarchies or more create more and more distance from the original business requirements. Even though our original process had only two levels of hierarchy system context-level use case and one level below we always had trouble with teams who wanted to add levels and confuse themselves. To this end, we've added a new tool to our familiar set of tools and filters: the hierarchy killer. We hope you have fun killing hierarchies everywhere. Use cases are different from other types of requirements techniques in many ways, but one particular difference is in the realm of traceability.
Use cases are much more traceable back to the business needs, and also traceable into the software development artifacts, to everything from UML analysis and design artifacts to testing, documentation, training, security and even parts of the architecture. We've decided to dedicate a chapter to this traceability phenomenon of use cases, to show opportunities for making sure the team is "working on the right thing. Finally, in the interests of keeping up-to-date with the technological tools of requirements gathering, we've listed the tools available at this writing and given some ideas as to their best use.
Since these tools change so quickly and books get written so slowly, especially by us! We hope you enjoy this second edition of Use Cases: Requirements in Context. We've enjoyed creating the updates and going through the publishing cycle again with our publishers at Pearson Education. Please feel free to contact us with your ideas, experiences and comments anytime. Our e-mail addresses are listed at the end of the last chapter in the book. Download the Index file related to this title. Get unlimited day access to over 30, books about UX design, leadership, project management, teams, agile development, analytics, core programming, and so much more.
Add To My Wish List. About Features Thoroughly updated and revised, the second edition of a popular tutorial on how to apply use cases effectively in determining requirements. Table of Contents Preface. What Is a Requirement? Functional Requirements. Nonfunctional Requirements. Requirements Gathering, Definition, and Specification. The Challenges of Requirements Gathering. Finding Out What the Users Need. Documenting Users' Needs. Avoiding Premature Design Assumptions.
Defining Project Scope: Context and Use Case Diagrams | Jama Software
Resolving Conflicting Requirements. Eliminating Redundant Requirements. Reducing Overwhelming Volume. Ensuring Requirements Traceability. Issues with the Standard Approaches. Diagram Filters can also be used when presenting the diagrams, to draw attention to parts of the diagrams and the diagrams can be presented as hand drawn or in a whiteboard style by changing the properties of the diagram. Learn more about the Use Case Diagram.
Use Case Diagram. PDF Library. Registered Users. All Users. Prev Next. Resources Resources UML 2. Information flow can be modeled using UML activity diagrams. The line between the Enroll in Seminar use case and the Registrar actor has no arrowhead, indicating it is not clear how the interaction between the system and registrars start.
Download Limit Exceeded
Perhaps a registrar may notice a student needs help and offers assistance, whereas other times, the student may request help from the registrar, important information that would be documented in the description of the use case. Actors are always involved with at least one use case and are always drawn on the outside edges of a use case diagram.
Figure 2. Using System boundary boxes to indicate releases. Figure 3.
Applying packages to simplify use case diagrams. I like to start by identifying as many actors as possible. You should ask how the actors interact with the system to identify an initial set of use cases. Then, on the diagram, you connect the actors with the use cases with which they are involved. If an actor supplies information, initiates the use case, or receives any information as a result of the use case, then there should be an association between them.
I generally don't include arrowheads on the association lines because my experience is that people confuse them for indications of information flow, not initial invocation.