Session:Architecture Compliance--Discussions

From WICSA Conference Wiki

Please use this page to capture ideas, thoughts, reactions, opinions and so on about the content of this session.

Attendees

Please add yourself to this list. Tell us something about your background. Add to the Discussions questions section below a few sentences about the session topic such as your position and questions you would like to see discussed.

• Patricia Lago, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Session Chair
• Dan Paulish, Siemens Corporate Research (USA), General Chair
• Remco de Boer, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Presenting author of "Constructing a Reading Guide for Software Product Audits"

Key ideas

(key ideas, how papers relate to each other and support the session theme)

• key idea 1: all papers address the problem of identifying architecture compliance in an explicit way.
• key idea 2: All the three papers carry out a kind of post-mortem check of architecture compliance.
• key idea 3: Papers 1 and 3 both discuss the process aspects of supporting compliance. Paper 2 discusses the 'product' aspect of compliance.
• key idea 4: Peculiarities of the three papers: paper 1 discusses rules to secure compliance upfront. Paper 2 addresses the problem of compliance of an existing architecture documentation to the expectations of auditors. Compliance provides guidelines to conducting an independent audit. Paper 3 addresses methods for static checking of architecture compliance.

Discussion questions

• Question 1: Do we need specific architectural view/viewpoints dedicated to compliance?
• Question 2: The three papers address different ways of using compliance, namely for quality assurance (papers 1 and 3) and to provide guidance for auditors (paper 2). Do we recognize further uses of compliance?

Discussions

(pre-session, session, post-session, post-mortem)