CFP last date
22 April 2024
Reseach Article

Software Template for Evaluating and Scoring Software Project Documentations

by Vikas S. Chomal, Jatinderkumar R. Saini
International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 116 - Number 1
Year of Publication: 2015
Authors: Vikas S. Chomal, Jatinderkumar R. Saini
10.5120/20300-2333

Vikas S. Chomal, Jatinderkumar R. Saini . Software Template for Evaluating and Scoring Software Project Documentations. International Journal of Computer Applications. 116, 1 ( April 2015), 15-27. DOI=10.5120/20300-2333

@article{ 10.5120/20300-2333,
author = { Vikas S. Chomal, Jatinderkumar R. Saini },
title = { Software Template for Evaluating and Scoring Software Project Documentations },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { April 2015 },
volume = { 116 },
number = { 1 },
month = { April },
year = { 2015 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 15-27 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume116/number1/20300-2333/ },
doi = { 10.5120/20300-2333 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T22:55:53.365574+05:30
%A Vikas S. Chomal
%A Jatinderkumar R. Saini
%T Software Template for Evaluating and Scoring Software Project Documentations
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 116
%N 1
%P 15-27
%D 2015
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Significant documentation is been formed with almost all software projects, irrespective of application. Software project documentation is a perspective whose purpose is to communicate information about the software system. For research purpose documentations of final year students of Masters level course have been considered for the research purpose. These documentations consist of the artefacts like requirement analysis, technical environment, database design, structural and object oriented modelling techniques, screen layouts and testing techniques along with test case and data. The results were compiled from 505 large software project documentations developed during a period of academic years from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012. The duration of these software projects was six months. Errors from these software project documentations were found and these errors were classified into 11 broad error categories. After compilation of results and studying various artefacts in software project documentations 103 software attributes were recognized. These software attributes were classified into two broad classes (a) Quantifiable attributes and (b) Non-quantifiable attributes. Out of 103 software attributes, 39 were quantifiable attributes and 64 non- quantifiable attributes. Subsequent to categorization, weights were assigned to these quantifiable software attributes only for which a survey was conducted. The basic goal of assigning weights to these quantifiable attributes was to score software project documentation. Further, software template is been proposed for evaluating and scoring student's software projects documentation.

References
  1. Arthur J. D. , Stevens K. T. , "Assessing the adequacy of documentation through document quality indicators", Software Maintenance, 1989. , Proceedings. , Conference on DOI: 10. 1109/ICSM. 1989. 65192 Publication Year: 1989 , Page(s): 40 – 49.
  2. Boer R. , "Writing and Reading Software Documentation: How the Development Process may Affect Understanding", proceeding of 2009 ICSE workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects on Software Engineering.
  3. Briand L. C. , "Software documentation: how much is Enough?" Published in: Software Maintenance and Reengineering, 2003. Proceedings, Seventh European Conference on 26 – 28 March 2003, pages 13 – 15, ISSN – 1534 – 5351.
  4. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , " Cataloguing Most Severe Causes that lead Software Projects to Fail", International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication , May – 2014 ISSN: 2321-8169 Volume: 2 Issue: 5 pages 1143– 1147
  5. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Finding Trend of Both Frequency and Type of Errors from Software Project Documentation?, International Journal of Emerging Trends and Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)ISSN 2278-6856, Volume 2, Issue 5, September – October 2013
  6. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Identification and Analysis of Causes for Software Failures?, National Journal Of Computer Science And Technology] Volume: 04 | Issue: 02 | July – December – 2012
  7. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Software Quality Improvement by Documentation – Knowledge Management Model?, National Journal of System And Information Technology ISSN : 0974 – 3308, Volume 6, Number 1, June 2013, Page Number: 49 – 68
  8. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Software Template to Improve Quality of Database Design on basis of Error Identification from Software Project Documentation?, International Journal of Engineering and Management Research ISSN No. : 2250-0758,Volume-4, Issue-1, February-2014, Page Number: 168-179
  9. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Significance of Software Documentation in Software Development Process" International Journal of Engineering Innovation and Research, ISSN: 2277 – 5668, Volume 3, Issue 4
  10. Chomal V. S. , Saini J. R. , "Identification, Categorization and Weighting of Software Engineering Attributes for Quality Evaluation of Software Project Documentation", International Journal of Advanced Networking Applications (IJANA), ISSN No: 0975 – 0290, page – 53, 2014.
  11. Cook C. R. , M. Visconti M. , "New and Improved Documentation Process Model", Proceedings of the 14th Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference, 1996.
  12. Delaney D. , Brown S. , "Document Templates For Student Projects In Software Engineering", Department of Computer Science, National University of Ireland, Maynooth Date: August 2002 Technical Report: NUIM-CS-TR2002-05
  13. Forward A. J. , "Software Documentation – Building and Maintaining Artefacts of Communication", presented to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master in Computer Science, Ottawa – Carleton Institute of Computer Science, University of Ottawa, Canada, 2002.
  14. Forward A. J. , "The Relevance of Software Documentation, Tools and Technologies: A Survey", Proceeding 2002 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering.
  15. Hilburn T. B. , Towhidnejad M. , "Software Quality: A Curriculum Postscript?, Proceeding SIGCSE 2000 at thirty first SIGCSE technical symposium of computer science and education.
  16. Jazzar A. , Scacchi W. , "Understanding the requirements for information system documentation: an empirical investigation", COOCS `95, Sheraton Silicon Valley, California, USA, ACM Press, p268 – 279.
  17. Kipyegen N. J, William P. K. K. , "Importance of Software Documentation", International Journal of Computer Science, Vol. 10, Issue: 5, No. 1, September, 2013, ISSN: 1694 - 0784
  18. Laitinen K. , "Document Classification for Software Quality Systems", Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT) Computer Technology Laboratory, ACM SIGSOFT SOFTWARE ENGINEERING NOTES vol 17 no 4 Oct 1992 Page 32
  19. Nasution M. F. F , Weinstroffer H. R. "Documentation in Systems Development: A Significant Criterion for Project Success" HICSS 2009 42nd Hawaii International
  20. Scheff B. H. ,Georgon T. , "Letting software engineers do software engineering or freeing software engineers from the shackles of documentation", p81 – 91, SIGDOC '88, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, ACM Press, 1988.
  21. Sulaiman S. , Sahibudding S. , "Production and maintenance of system documentation: what, why, when and how tools should support the practice", Published in: Software Engineering Conference, 2002. Ninth Asia-Pacific, pages 558 – 5667, ISSN – 1530 – 1362.
  22. Visconti M. , Cook C. , "Software System Documentation Process Maturity Model", Proceeding CSC '93 of the 1993 ACM conference on Computer Science Pages 352 – 357 New York, USA, (1993).
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Errors Error Category Non – Quantifiable Attributes Quantifiable Attributes Software Attributes