Google Git
Sign in
eclipse / epf / org.eclipse.epf.nl-libraries / f803e1e73982019d7a4d1e344be05ff845e9ee9d / . / OpenUP / OpenUP_baseline_EN / exported_HTML_1_0 / openup / guidances / checklists / use_case.html
blob: 797caaef17bc68a6a40c63c24fda13c118abed1f [file] [log] [blame]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C/DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<!-- VERSION rmc:7.1.0 -->
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<title>openup&amp;#92;guidances&amp;#92;checklists&amp;#92;&amp;#92;use_case.xmi</title>
</head>
<!-- WARNING: do not modify the generated comments in this file below this line. They are used as markers for the import process. -->
<body>
Element Name: use_case.xmi<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: presentationName<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:presentationName,_0kNwINk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 3319967926 -->Use Case<!-- END:presentationName,_0kNwINk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: briefDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:briefDescription,_0kNwINk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 272819987 -->This checklist provides questions to verify that use cases are described in a consistent and complete manner.<!-- END:briefDescription,_0kNwINk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 3586872873 -->Is the use-case name meaningful and unambiguous?<!-- END:name,_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 453351223 --><ul>
<li> Does the use case have a unique name? </li>
<li> Is the name a verb + noun phrase (for example, Withdraw Cash)? </li>
<li> Does the name accurately&nbsp;summarize the&nbsp;main purpose&nbsp;of the
use case? </li>
<li> Is the name Actor-independent? </li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 2587034568 -->Does the brief description clearly describe the primary goal of the use case?<!-- END:name,_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 3342797654 --><ul>
<li> Is it clear from the brief description what the main purpose of the use
case is? </li>
<li> Is the "observable result of value" obvious? </li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 305113753 -->Are associated Actors and information exchanged clearly defined?<!-- END:name,_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 239875407 --><ul>
<li> Is the use case associated with one or more Actors? </li>
<li> Is the primary, or initiating Actor, defined? </li>
<li> Is it clear who performs the actions in the use case? </li>
<li> Is all information exchanged between the Actors and the system clearly
specified? </li>
<li> If a "time" actor is used, are you sure you did not miss an important Actor
and associated use cases (such as administrative or maintenance personnel
who define schedule events)? </li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 2655536127 -->Are the pre-conditions specified?<!-- END:name,_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 2667181473 --><p> Does each precondition represent a tangible&nbsp;state&nbsp;of&nbsp;the system
(for example, the Withdraw Cash use case for an automated teller machine has
a precondition that the user has an account)? </p><!-- END:sectionDescription,_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 1200479780 -->Are the basic flow and alternative flows complete, correct, and consistent?<!-- END:name,_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 1408183859 --><ul>
<li>
Is it clear how the use case starts?
</li>
<li>
Is the triggering event clearly described?
</li>
<li>
Does the flow have a definite ending?
</li>
<li>
Does&nbsp;each step in the scenario contain&nbsp;the same level of abstraction?&nbsp;&nbsp;
</li>
<li>
Does each step in the scenario describe something that can actually happen and that the system can reasonably
detect?
</li>
<li>
Does each step make&nbsp;progress toward the goal?
</li>
<li>
Are there any missing steps? Is it clear how to go from one step to the next? Does the sequence of communication
between the Actors and the use cases conform to the users' expectations?
</li>
<li>
Does each step describe how the step helps the Actors achieve their goals?
</li>
<li>
Is each step technology-independent? Is it free of technical details and inadvertent design decisions?
</li>
<li>
Are the steps correctly numbered?
</li>
<li>
For each alternate flow,&nbsp;are the conditions for initiation of the flow clearly defined?
</li>
<li>
For each alternate flow, is it clear how the use case ends or where in the basic flow that the use case resumes?
</li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 3961501011 -->Are the post-conditions specified?<!-- END:name,_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA CRC: 153640626 --><ul>
<li>
If Minimal Guarantees are present, do they always happen when the use case completes, regardless of success? (A
Minimal Guarantee represents&nbsp;a condition&nbsp;that will be true when the use case ends, regardless of how it
terminates.)
</li>
<li>
If Success Guarantees are present, do they always happen when the use case completes successfully? (A Success
Guarantee represents a condition that will be true when the use case ends successfully, regardless of which path it
takes.)
</li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: name<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:name,_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 3531922829 -->Are applicable nonfunctional requirements captured?<!-- END:name,_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
<br/><br/><br/>
<!-- START NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
Attribute: sectionDescription<br/><br/>
<!-- END NON-TRANSLATABLE -->
<!-- START:sectionDescription,_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ CRC: 1809411740 --><ul>
<li> Are nonfunctional requirements (such as performance criteria) that are&nbsp;applicable
to the&nbsp;use case captured in the use case? </li>
<li> Are these nonfunctional requirements applicable to many use cases? It they
are, consider capturing them in the supporting Requirements Specification
to simplify maintenance. </li>
</ul><!-- END:sectionDescription,_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ -->
</body>
</html>