IEEE FIPA Design Process Documentation and Fragmentation WG

Hi,

I prepared a document describing/prescribing the structure of the process documentation template (find it here). I think this could be the backbone for the FIPA specification we are going to produce.

In the document I implicitly accept the usage of SPEM (with some extensions) as a process metamodel since it seems to me widely spread in the community and good enough to support our needs. Comments are welcome on that.

Please let me know if you agree on this new document or propose changes. This is an important step in our work!

Best Regards

Massimo

I would like to start the discussion about the process documentation template. I here propose an approach that I found useful. Please feel free to comment and to contribute different points of view.

It is based on SPEM 2.0 and it partially extends that (as reported in paper [1]). By now I am just considering the document structure, later I will go into further details (notation, metamodel, and so on).

The documentation is based on a few assumptions:

A) that the process workflow can be decomposed in 3 successive levels of details:

1. phase. For instance: System Requirements Analysis is a phase.
2. Activity. For instance Architecture Design is an activity
3. Step (it is an atomic element of the process). For instance Identify Actors is a step.

Please note that in my point of view phases and activities always deliver main work products (like diagrams, text docs and so on) while steps contribute to define these work products. This will help in next process of our activity, process fragmentation.

B) Work product notation (for instance UML) is not necessarily part of the process specification. Frequently existing notations are adopted and therefore it is not necesssary to detail them. When a customised or totally new notation is used, it can be  presented in the document or pointer to a complete documentation provided.
In my point of view the focus is not on modeling notation but rather on what is modeled (i.e. the instances of the MAS metamodel).

In the process template I suggest below, Phase and activities have a precise position in the template outline thus stressing the workflow representation of the process.

This is the outline I adopted:

1.Introduction

1.1.The (processname) Process lifecycle

1.2.The (processname) Metamodel

1.2.1Definition of MAS metamodel elements

2.Phases of the (processname) Process

2.1.(First) Phase

2.1.1.Process roles

2.1.2.Activity Details

2.1.3.Work Products

3.(Second) Phase

4. (further phases)

5.Work Product Dependencies

**An example of this outline is reported in this document**

References

[1] V. Seidita, M. Cossentino, S. Gaglio. Using and Extending the SPEM Specifications to Represent Agent Oriented Methodologies. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 5386-0086. Springer-Verlag GmbH. 2009. (pdf)

This is an internal working website of the FIPA DPDF WG.

Please refer to the official website (here) for information about this group scope and activity.

You must register in order to access the site. Registration is allowed only to WG members. Please contact the WG chairs for further information.

M. Cossentino