Requirements, SRS, Validation, Verification - - - - oh my god [modified]
-
Hello to all readers, I'm reading now for a while requirements-literature and the more I read, the more I'm confused. One of my basic questions is: What is in a SRS? a) are there user-requirements exclusively? (e.g. "data must be stored" ) b) or are there only requirements for my software which are derived from the user-requirements? (e.g. data are stored in a SQL-Database) c) Is any architecture/design specification/model also included in a SRS? Does somebody have a nice link? Best regards
modified on Sunday, May 24, 2009 1:02 PM
-
Hello to all readers, I'm reading now for a while requirements-literature and the more I read, the more I'm confused. One of my basic questions is: What is in a SRS? a) are there user-requirements exclusively? (e.g. "data must be stored" ) b) or are there only requirements for my software which are derived from the user-requirements? (e.g. data are stored in a SQL-Database) c) Is any architecture/design specification/model also included in a SRS? Does somebody have a nice link? Best regards
modified on Sunday, May 24, 2009 1:02 PM
http://www.epmo.scio.nc.gov/documents/docs_PortfolioManagmentInitiative/Templates/SRSPLAN.doc[^]
CodingYoshi Visual Basic is for basic people, C# is for sharp people. Farid Tarin '07
-
Hello to all readers, I'm reading now for a while requirements-literature and the more I read, the more I'm confused. One of my basic questions is: What is in a SRS? a) are there user-requirements exclusively? (e.g. "data must be stored" ) b) or are there only requirements for my software which are derived from the user-requirements? (e.g. data are stored in a SQL-Database) c) Is any architecture/design specification/model also included in a SRS? Does somebody have a nice link? Best regards
modified on Sunday, May 24, 2009 1:02 PM
User Requirement and SRS (System Requirements Specification) is not the same. There is a fundamental difference. User Requirement is recorded in a User Requirement Specification. Whereas in SRS, we record the system behavior and functionality. SRS focuses on the system purely and is derived from the URS (User Requirement Specification). However in SRS, we can also put any non-functional requirement like Performance requirement, Environment Requirements and so on so forth. In SRS, we can put in User Case Diagrams, but not pure system diagrams which should be put in High Level Design Specs, Module Specs or Low Level Design specs. Hope this clear your doubts. Any queries, please feel free to contact me.
-
User Requirement and SRS (System Requirements Specification) is not the same. There is a fundamental difference. User Requirement is recorded in a User Requirement Specification. Whereas in SRS, we record the system behavior and functionality. SRS focuses on the system purely and is derived from the URS (User Requirement Specification). However in SRS, we can also put any non-functional requirement like Performance requirement, Environment Requirements and so on so forth. In SRS, we can put in User Case Diagrams, but not pure system diagrams which should be put in High Level Design Specs, Module Specs or Low Level Design specs. Hope this clear your doubts. Any queries, please feel free to contact me.
Thank you for your reply. I'm currently fighting hard with the terms. I read a lot more meanwhile (e.g. Axel van Lamsweerde: Requirements Engineering) and I hope this cleaned up my mind. Let me tell my ideas in the following (should be compliant to your statements). Can you revise my statements? 1) A user requirement is what I get from any customer - exclusively in his words (problem-domain) (e.g. "the route of the truck must be planned in advance"). This is content of a "user requirement specification" (URS). 2) From this URS I derive a SRS (e.g. by Object Oriented Analysis). An SRS does not contain any solution elements (e.g. Architecture, Design,..); It deals only and exclusively with the problem-domain. The goal is to structure the problem domain. There are three basic elements for getting some abstraction/organization into the problem-domain: a) Object-Diagrams for the structure (e.g. based on UML class diagrams) b) Behavioral Diagrams (e.g. state-machines) c) Operational Diagrams (e.g. Usecases,Szenarios,...) d) Beside of this there is usually a "textual" description of the "nonfunctional" Requirements. Alternatively parts a), b) and c) can exclusively also be expressed in "natural language" All this is SRS 3) After that the first technical elements come into the play. e.g. Architecture followed by design,... Do you agree to this sequence and content? Thank you again for your reply Best regards
-
Thank you for your reply. I'm currently fighting hard with the terms. I read a lot more meanwhile (e.g. Axel van Lamsweerde: Requirements Engineering) and I hope this cleaned up my mind. Let me tell my ideas in the following (should be compliant to your statements). Can you revise my statements? 1) A user requirement is what I get from any customer - exclusively in his words (problem-domain) (e.g. "the route of the truck must be planned in advance"). This is content of a "user requirement specification" (URS). 2) From this URS I derive a SRS (e.g. by Object Oriented Analysis). An SRS does not contain any solution elements (e.g. Architecture, Design,..); It deals only and exclusively with the problem-domain. The goal is to structure the problem domain. There are three basic elements for getting some abstraction/organization into the problem-domain: a) Object-Diagrams for the structure (e.g. based on UML class diagrams) b) Behavioral Diagrams (e.g. state-machines) c) Operational Diagrams (e.g. Usecases,Szenarios,...) d) Beside of this there is usually a "textual" description of the "nonfunctional" Requirements. Alternatively parts a), b) and c) can exclusively also be expressed in "natural language" All this is SRS 3) After that the first technical elements come into the play. e.g. Architecture followed by design,... Do you agree to this sequence and content? Thank you again for your reply Best regards
Great!!! You are absolutely correct. Now you have very good clarity on the User Requirement, Functional Requirement Specs. Regarding the Architecture and Technical Designs, based on the complexity of the system, you can have elaborated Use-Case designs in the Form of High Level Design Specs. In the next level, you can have Low Level Design Specs or Unit Secification detailing the objects, entities etc for the relevant Unit of the System in great detail. Unit Specs often acts as the blue print for the developer of the system and you should be able to derive Unit Test Cases from the Unit Specs. System Test Cases from the SRS. Integration Test Cases from High Level Design Specs and Unit Specs. Hope this helps you. Feel free to contact me, if you have any doubts / queries. Regards, Robin
-
Great!!! You are absolutely correct. Now you have very good clarity on the User Requirement, Functional Requirement Specs. Regarding the Architecture and Technical Designs, based on the complexity of the system, you can have elaborated Use-Case designs in the Form of High Level Design Specs. In the next level, you can have Low Level Design Specs or Unit Secification detailing the objects, entities etc for the relevant Unit of the System in great detail. Unit Specs often acts as the blue print for the developer of the system and you should be able to derive Unit Test Cases from the Unit Specs. System Test Cases from the SRS. Integration Test Cases from High Level Design Specs and Unit Specs. Hope this helps you. Feel free to contact me, if you have any doubts / queries. Regards, Robin
-
Hi Roy, for the moment I'm fine. Thank you for your support - it helped me a lot Best regards
-
Thank you for your reply. I'm currently fighting hard with the terms. I read a lot more meanwhile (e.g. Axel van Lamsweerde: Requirements Engineering) and I hope this cleaned up my mind. Let me tell my ideas in the following (should be compliant to your statements). Can you revise my statements? 1) A user requirement is what I get from any customer - exclusively in his words (problem-domain) (e.g. "the route of the truck must be planned in advance"). This is content of a "user requirement specification" (URS). 2) From this URS I derive a SRS (e.g. by Object Oriented Analysis). An SRS does not contain any solution elements (e.g. Architecture, Design,..); It deals only and exclusively with the problem-domain. The goal is to structure the problem domain. There are three basic elements for getting some abstraction/organization into the problem-domain: a) Object-Diagrams for the structure (e.g. based on UML class diagrams) b) Behavioral Diagrams (e.g. state-machines) c) Operational Diagrams (e.g. Usecases,Szenarios,...) d) Beside of this there is usually a "textual" description of the "nonfunctional" Requirements. Alternatively parts a), b) and c) can exclusively also be expressed in "natural language" All this is SRS 3) After that the first technical elements come into the play. e.g. Architecture followed by design,... Do you agree to this sequence and content? Thank you again for your reply Best regards
Hello to all, it's me again. Reading more and more, I begin to doubt my own statements in my last contribution. Here I wrote under point b): " ... no arichitectural elements .... It (SRS) deals only and exclusively with the problem-domain. The goal is to structure the problem". Is this really true? Does a SRS really have no SW-architectural Elements? Is it's only purpose to structure/understand the problem-domain? If this is true, then: Where are the models for architecture coming up? Best regards