Toward a Software Architecture Design Method

A Framework for Architecture Design

Paola Yuritzy Reyes Delgado

, Laura C. Rodríguez-Martínez

, Hector A. Duran-Limon

José Manuel Mora Tavarez

, González Ricardo Mendoza

and Mario Alberto Rodríguez Díaz

Instituto Tecnológico de Aguascalientes, Av. Adolfo López Mateos No. 1801, Fracc. Bona Gens, Aguascalientes, Mexico

Universidad de Guadalajara, CUCEA, Jalisco, Mexico

Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes, Aguascalientes, Mexico

1 STAGE OF THE RESEARCH

Software Architecture (SA) design is an essential

activity in the development of software systems.

According to Kim and Garlan (2010, p. 1216), a

strong progress has been reached in software

architecture design given that: “today we ﬁnd

growing use of standards, architecture-based

development methods, and handbooks for

architectural design and documentation”.

However, due to the increasing complexity of

software systems (Aleti et al., 2013), as well as the,

"emerging trends in SA, i.e., Service oriented

architecture, Product line architecture, Aspect

oriented architecture, and Model driven architecture"

(Qureshi et al., 2013), software architecture designs

methods, are relevant to be elaborated, studied,

documented, used and evaluated.

According to Rodríguez et al. (2012, p. 1),

“Service-Oriented Software Engineering (SoSE) is a

new paradigm of software engineering, which is

focused on the design and implementation of

service-oriented software systems (SoSS)”.

Within this context, we conducted a literature

review, in which we found that there are not any

software architecture design methods specifically

focused on the development of Web-based service-

oriented software systems.

The main objective of this research is to define a

software architecture design method for Web-based

service-oriented software systems.

To accomplish this, the research model presented

in Figure 1 is proposed, which shows the elements to

be taken into account for the design of our method.

Such elements are the following:

P1. Search and Study Information related to

Our Research: This step investigates the

background and context of the research problem or

need. It identifies and studies the foundations and

related studies.

P2. Analysis of Area and sub Areas of

Knowledge, and related Studies: This step

involves studying those design factors (if any) that

are deemed to substantially affect the results when

applying the method. This step also includes

analyzing and classifying relevant information

related to our research.

P3. Development of Conceptual Framework

based on: Systematic Review, architectures and

styles following the guidelines used in the Design

Science research (Hevner, March, Park & Ram,

2004): In this step, we analize the data obtained

from the conceptual framework.

P4. Method Development: Here, we construct

the design method based on the analysis results of

the conceptual framework.

P5. Presentation Method to Consultants and

experts for!: (i) Firstly, the developed method is

presented to a panel of experts for their evaluation.

(ii) Secondly, we will carry out a logical argument

validation, which “consists in the development of

logical arguments, ! evaluate the proposed method

using a case example and compare its effectiveness

against others software architecture design methods.

A group of students of software engineering will use

our method and other methods to guide the

development of the case example. Then, we will

quantitatively evaluate the results obtained by using

the different methods.

In the case of steps P1, …, P6 of Figure 1, the

conceptual research method by Mora (2004) is used.

Our current research progress is up to step P3. We

are currently addressing step P4.

Reyes Delgado P., Rodríguez-Martínez L., A. Duran-Limon H., Mora Tavarez J., Ricardo Mendoza G. and Rodríguez Díaz M..

Toward a Software Architecture Design Method - A Framework for Architecture Design.

 2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

Figure 1: Research Model for the generation and

validation of a software architecture design method for

Web-based service-oriented software systems.

2 OUTLINE OF OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this research is to “define a

software architecture design method for Web-based

service-oriented software systems.” The specific

objectives are:

O1. Find the main contributions and limitations

of current software architecture design methods.

O.2. Identify useful design principles for the

software architecture design of Web-based service-

oriented software systems.

O.3. Design the architectural development

method based on the identification of activities and

products of architectural design methods analysed in

the specific objective O.1. Also, take into account

the principles found in objective O.2.

O.4. Carry out a theoretical validation of our

proposed software architecture design method by

using logic argumentation as well as an assessment

of an expert panel.

O.5. Carry out an empirical evaluation of our

software architecture design method by means of a

case example.

O.6. Compare the effectiveness of our software

architecture design method with others software

architecture design methods. The effectiveness of

software design method will be tested by a group of

software engineering students. The evaluation

process will be twofold. Firstly, we will measure to

which extent an architecture design produced by a

software design method satisfies the functional and

not functional requirements. Secondly, we will

measure to which extent the risks associated with the

construction of a software system are reduced

(Pressman, 2002).

3 RESEARCH PROBLEM

This research problem is located into the knowledge

area of Software Design (SWEBOK, 2004), within

Software Engineering.

According to Gu and Lago (2009, p. 289), “It is

often argued, in both academia and industry,

whether the existing software engineering and

architecting approaches (including techniques,

methods and tools) are applicable as is in the context

of SOA [Service Oriented Architecture]. However,

since their ‘real’ differences with TSE [Traditional

Software Engineering] remain fuzzy”. “As a result,

new approaches and design principles to build

service-oriented systems have been continuously

emerging”.

Within this context, we conducted a literature

review, in which we found that most of software

architecture design methods are focused on the

development of generic software systems, i.e., those

methods do not consider the application domain

area. A disadvantage of using generic methods is

that it is not possible to emphasize the characteristics

and specific goals of the application domain. For

example, "architectural design of information

systems emphasizes dates modeling, and

architecture design of telecommunication software

emphasizes continuous operation, live upgrade, and

interoperability" (Hofmeister et al., 2007, p. 106).

Only a few software architecture design methods are

focused on different domains for which they were

created (types of systems, type of company: e.g.,

large or small, etc.) (Hofmeister et al., 2007).

However, no efforts have been carried out for

developing a software architecture design method,

specifically, for Web-based service-oriented

software systems.

4 STATE OF THE ART

In this section we first introduce some common

terminology of the areas that are related to our

research work. Following, we present some relevant

related work.

The IEEE Computer Society defines Software

Engineering (SE) as “(1) The application of a

systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the

development, operation, and maintenance of

software; that is, the application of engineering to

TowardaSoftwareArchitectureDesignMethod-AFrameworkforArchitectureDesign

software. (2) The study of approaches as in (1).”

(SWEBOK, 2004, p. 1-9). According to SEWBOK

(2004), Software Engineering (SE) can be divided

into ten areas of knowledge: Software Requirements,

Software Design, Software Construction, Software

Testing, Software Maintenance, Software

Configuration Management, Software Engineering

Management, Software Engineering Process,

Software Engineering Tools and Methods, and

Software Quality. Other definitions include the

provided one by Pressman (2002, p. xxix), which

defines software engineering as “…the practical

application of scientific knowledge in the design and

construction of computer programs and associated

documentation required to develop, operate and

maintain.”

In the SE research area, Software Development

Methodologies (SDMs) have evolved toward better

methodologies (Vavpotic and Vasilecas, 2011). In

the last four decades, a large variety of SDMs have

been proposed (Avison and Fitzgerald, 2003). The

evolution of such SDMs has been carried out in four

areas (Rodríguez et al., 2008): pre-methodologies,

rigor-oriented methodologies, agile-oriented

methodologies and emergent service-oriented

methodologies. Also, the SDMs can be classified

according to different criteria, e.g., means the user's

software needs in a functional or non-functional

requirements or means the complexity size of the

systems. Software system projects can be small,

medium or large according to the demanded number

of lines of code or required human effort (Rizwan

Jameel Qureshi, 2012). Such projects can be also

simple or complex: "from small and simple: e.g.,

software for simple web-shops; to highly specialized

and complex software systems: software for

information systems used in manufacture based on

complex mathematical models" (Vavpotic and

Vasilecas, 2011, p. 107).

All SDMs include an important task called

Software Design. Such a task is defined by the

IEEE 610.12-90 as: "the process of defining the

architecture, components, interfaces, and other

characteristics of a system or component” and “the

result of [that] process” (SWEBOK, 2004, pp. 1-4).

Also, the SWEBOK (2004) states that: "Viewed as a

process, software design (the result) must describe

the software architecture—that is, how software is

decomposed and organized into components—and

the interfaces between those components. It must

also describe the components at a level of detail that

enable their construction". At the same time,

according to the IEEE 12207.0-96. standard, the

Software Architecture Design and the Detailed

Design are two core activities among the initial

requirements analysis and final software

construction (Brown et al., 1998; SWEBOK, 2004;

Vogel, Arnold, Chughtai and Kehrer, 2011) as

follow: “Software architectural design (also known

as top level design, high-level design, macro-

architecture): describing software’s top-level

structure and organization and identifying the

various components.” and “Software detailed design

(also known as bottom level design, low-level

design, and micro-architecture): describing each

component sufficiently to allow for its construction.”

The concept of Software Architecture is used in

various contexts (Mark et al., 2004), and there are

numerous definitions of the term “software

architecture” in Information Technology (IT), hence,

it is a challenge to find one universal definition

(Vogel et al., 2011). In this paper, we use the

software architecture definition of ISO/ IEC/IEEE

42010:2011 (2011, p. 2) standard: "Fundamental

concepts or properties of a system in its environment

embodied in its elements, relationships, and in the

principles of its design and evolution". Then we use

the term Software Architecture Design Methods to

refer to the methods that “describe” how to design a

software architecture. According to Vogel et al.

(2011, p. 319) an architecture method is a “…

prerequisite for a successful architecture".

In recent years, several design methodologies

and frameworks have been proposed (Lee & Shirani,

2004; Hofmeister et al., 2007). We have reviewed

four well-known software development

methodologies as well as an emergent methodology.

The main goal of this review was to identify and

compare the software architecture design methods of

such software development methodologies. Our

analysis was based on the evaluation of software

architectural design method carried out by

Hofmeister et al. (2007).

We considered the Software Architecture Design

Methods

that are (explicitly or implicitly)

included in five well-known Software

Development Methodologies (SDMs).

1. Model-Based (System) Architecting and

Software Engineering (MBASE), (MBASE,

2000, 2003)

2. IBM Rational Unified Process for Systems Z

(Cantor, 2003; Péraire et al., 2007).

3. Unified Process for Education (UPEDU)

(Robillard et al., 2004, 2012).

4. Team Software Process (TSP) (Humphrey,

1998; Donald, 2000; Humphrey et al., 2010).

5. Service-oriented Software Development

Methodology (SoSDM) (Rodríguez et al.,

ICEIS2014-DoctoralConsortium

2009).

Our findings have been reported elsewhere (Reyes et

al., 2013, under review) and suggest that: (i)

software architecture design methods are not

standardized; (ii) SA design methods share common

goals but carry out different activities; and (iii)

further empirical research is required to consolidate

valuable knowledge gained from conceptual

research in software architecture design methods.

Regarding the application domain area we will

focus on for constructing our method, we have that:

“Web services are self-contained, Web-enabled

applications capable not only of performing business

activities on their own, but also possessing the

ability to engage other Web services in order to

complete higher-order business transactions”(Yang,

2003, p. 35). In addition, according to Rodríguez et

al., (2012, p. 5). “A service-oriented software system

(SoSS) refers to a distributed and loosely-coupled

software system which is constructed based on the

definition and implementation of a suite of services

that forms it“.

A typical SoSS involves the features shown in the

Table 1:

Table 1: Comparative Table of Object-Oriented Software

Engineering (OOSE), Component-Based Software

Engineering (CBSE) y Service-Oriented Software

Engineering (SOSE) paradigms (Rodríguez et al., 2004).

Attribute

Object-

oriented

Software

System

Component-

based

Software

System

Service-

oriented

Software

Systems

Key analysis

entity

Class

Business

component

Business

service

Key design

entity

Object

(conceptual

)

Component

(conceptual)

Business

computing

service

ey building

entity

Object

(local

runtime)

Component

(local or

distributed

runtime)

ICT

computing

service

Coupling

level with

remainder

software

Tightly Medium Loosely

Cohesion

level

Normal High Very high

Platform

Interoperabil

ity

Minimal or

null

High Very high

Typical

technology

C++ JavaBeans

Web services

from several

languages

(Java, C#,

PHP)

5 METHODOLOGY

The research focuses on the study and creation of

innovative model or artefacts, using two research

approaches:

 Theoretical research (conceptual-analysis).

 Engineering research (through design- science).

The main purpose of this research is proposing a

Software Architecture Design Method, whose design

will be based first under the theoretical concepts

included in General Design Methods, in order to

obtain an applicable Method for develop Web-based

service-oriented software systems, therefore the

research classified as conceptual.

The conceptual research can be considered: “as

the main source of generation of new theories,

models or conceptual schemes - to complement the

scientific cycle - then should be tested empirically or

deductively using other research methods” (Mora,

2004).

"However, according a review of international

literature in the field, has not been reported

consensed phases to follow in the Conceptual

Method” (Mora, 2004, p. 2). Therefore Mora (2004),

proposes four phases to the conceptual method,

which are based on general suggestions reported by

researchers reffering to validating conceptual

models, principles for evaluating theoretical

research, and methods and techniques used in the

qualitative assessment. Figure 2 shows the phases

and tasks of the conceptual reseach method.

Figure 2: Phases Description Conceptual Research

Method.

This Conceptual Research Method suggests four

forms of validation of the designed artifacts that are

product of a research: (i) validation by experts’

TowardaSoftwareArchitectureDesignMethod-AFrameworkforArchitectureDesign

panel, (ii) validation by logical arguments, (iii)

validation by proof of concept for artifact

construction, and (iv) validation by pilot study.

“The studies of conceptual validation can be

referred to the establishment of the degree to which

the conceptual model satisfactorily meets the

following criteria: (a) the conceptual model is

supported by robust theories and principles, (b) the

conceptual model is logically coherent and

consistent with the studied reality and appropriate to

the purpose for which the model was designed, and

new and it is not duplication of another existing

model” (Mora, 2004, pp. 9-10 ).

The directives or guidelines of design science

proposed in Hevner, et al. (2004) will be followed to

design the artifact that is product of the research:

two paradigms characterize research in the discipline

of Information Systems, the Behavioral-Science

and Design-Science. “The Behavioral-Science

paradigm seeks to develop and verify theories that

explain or predict human or organizational behavior.

The Design-Science paradigm seeks to extend the

boundaries of human and organizational capabilities

by creating new and innovative artifacts” (Hevner et

al., 2004, p. 75). For this study, we consider just the

Design-Science paradigm because we only seeks the

creation, validation and evaluation of the

architectural design method and does not predict or

verify the behavior of individuals or organization

with respect to the proposed architectural design

method.

6 EXPECTED OUTCOME

The main contribution of this research aims to define

a software architecture design method for designing

the architecture of Web-based service-oriented

software systems. Our method will be able to be

applied in different national or international

organizations.

As a future work we will be looking at using this

method as a base framework to define an

architectural style that we will be instantiated in

several specific software systems architectures.

REFERENCES

Aleti, A., Buhnova, B., Grunske, L., & Koziolek A. 2013.

Software Architecture Optimization Methods: A

Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Transactions On

Software Engineering, 39(5), 658-683.

Avison, D. & Fitzgerald, G. 2003. Methodologies for

Developing Information Systems: A Historical

Perspective. The Past and Future of Information

Systems: 1976–2006 and Beyond, IFIP 19th World

Computer Congress, TC-8, Information System

Stream, August 21–23, 2006, Santiago, Chile.

Brown, W., Malveau, R., McCormick III, H., Mowbray,

T. 1998. Anti Patterns – Refactoring Software

Architectures, and Projects in Crisis, John Wiley &

Sons, New York.

Cantor, M. .2003. Rational Unified Process for Systems

Engineering. Rational Brand Services ,IBM Software

Group.

Donald, M. 2000. The Team Software Process (TSP): An

Overview and Preliminary Results of Using

Disciplined Practices. (Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-2000-

TR-015), Carnegie Mellon, Software Engineering

Institute.

Hevner, A., March, S., Park, J. & Ram, S., 2004. Design

Science in Information Systems Research, Mis

Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 1, (pp 75-105).

Hofmeister, C., Kruchten, F., Nord, R., Obbink, H., Ran,

A., & America, P. 2007. A general model of software

architecture design derived from ﬁve industrial

approaches. The Journal of System and Software, 80,

106-126, Elsevier Inc.

Humphrey, W. 1998. Three Dimensions of Process

Improvement Part III: The Team Process, Software

Engineering Institute.

Humphrey, W., Chick, T., Nichols,W., & Pomeroy-Huff,

Marsha. 2010. Team Software Process (TSP) Body of

Knowledge (BOK). (Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-2010-TR-

020). Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie

Mellon University.

ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011., 2011. Inernational Standar,

Systems and software engineering - Architecture

description ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011, first edition,

pp. 1-2. Retrieves Julio 26, 2013, from:

http://www.iso-architecture.org/42010/index.html.

Kim, J., S., & Garlan, D. 2010. Analyzing architectural

styles. The Journal of Systems and Software, 83,

1216–1235.

Kitchenham, B., 1996. Evaluating Software Engineering

Methods and Tool, Software Engineering Notes 21(1),

(pp. 11-15).

Lee, S., & Shirani, A. 2004. A component based

methodology for Web application development, The

Journal of Systems and Software, 71, 177-187.

Mark, W., Emery D., & Hilliard R. 2004. ANSI/ IEEE

Standard 1471 and System Engineering, System

Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 3.

MBASE. (2000). Guidelines for Model-Based (System)

Architecting and Software Engineering (MBASE)

1997-2000, v2.2, 1-159, Center for Software

Engineering, University of Southern California.

MBASE. (2003). Guidelines for Model-Based (System)

Architecting and Software Engineering (MBASE)

1997-2002, v2.4., Center for Software Engineering,

University of Southern California.Mora, J. 2004.

Descripción del Método de Investigación Conceptual,

ICEIS2014-DoctoralConsortium

Technical Report No. 2, Department of Information

Systems, Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes.

Péraire C., Edwards, M., Fernandes, A., Mancin, E., &

Carroll, K. .2007. The IBM Rational Unified Process

for System Z. IBM Rational Software.

Pressman, R. 2002. Ingeniería de Software – Un Enfoque

Práctico, Quinta Edición, McGraw-Hill Práctica,

2002.

Gu, Q. & Lago, P., 2009. On Service-Oriented

Architectural Concerns and Viewpoints, WICSA/

ECSA. (pp. 289-299).

Qureshi, N., Muhammad, U., & Ikram, N., 2013. Evidence

in Software Architecture, a Systematic Literature.

Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on

Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering,

(pp 97-106), ISBN: 978-1-4503-1848-8.

Reyes, P., Mora, J., Rodríguez, L., Duran-Limon, H.,

Mendoza R. & Rodríguez, M. (2013 under review).

State of the Art of Software Architecture Design

Methods used in Main Software Development

Methodologies, Encyclopedia of Information Science

and Technology, IGI Global.

Robillard, P. N., Kructen F., & d'Astous, P. 2004.

Software Engineering Process with UPEDU, Adison

Wesley.

Robillard, P. N., Kructen F., & d'Astous, P. 2011. Unified

Process for Education , (UPEDU). École

Polytechnique de Montréal, Retrieves October 27,

2013, from: http://www.upedu.org/.

Rodríguez, L. C., Mora, M., Vargas, M., O'Connor , R., &

Alvarez, F. 2008. Process Models of SDLCs:

Comparison and Evolution. M. Rahman Syed and S.

Nessa Syed Editors, Handbook of Research on

Modern Systems Analysis and Design Technologies

and Applications, (p. 76-89).

Rodríguez, L., Mora, J., Álvarez, F., Garza, A., Durán,

H., Muñoz, J. 2009. Diseño de un Modelo de Proceso

de Ciclo de Vida de Sistemas de Software, en el

Paradigma de Ingeniería de Software Orientada a

Servicios. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad

Autónoma de Aguascalientes.

Rodríguez-Martínez, L., Mora, M., Álvarez, F., Garza, L.,

Durán, H., & Muñoz, J. 2012. Review of Relevant

System Development Life Cycles (SDLCs) in Service-

Oriented Software Engineering (SoSE). Journal of

Applied Research and Technology, 10(2), 94-113.

Rizwan Jameel Qureshi, M. 2012. Agile software

development methodology for medium and large

projects. Journal IET Software, Vol. 6, ISS.4, pp. 358–

363.

SWEBOK. 2004. Guide to the Software Engineering Body

of Knowledge, IEEE Computer Society.

Vavpotic, D. & Vasilecas, O. 2011. An Approach for

Assessment of Software Development Methodologies

Suitability, System Engineering, Computer

Technology, ISSN 1392-1215.

Vogel, O., Arnold, I., Chughtai A., Kehrer T. (2011).

Software Architecture, A Comprehensive Framework

and Guide for Practitioners, Springer, ISBN 978-3-

642-19735-2.

Yang, J., 2003. Web Service Componentization,

Communications of the ACM, 46(10) (pp.35-40 )

TowardaSoftwareArchitectureDesignMethod-AFrameworkforArchitectureDesign