| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
| <org.eclipse.epf.uma:ContentDescription xmi:version="2.0" |
| xmlns:xmi="http://www.omg.org/XMI" xmlns:org.eclipse.epf.uma="http://www.eclipse.org/epf/uma/1.0.5/uma.ecore" |
| xmlns:epf="http://www.eclipse.org/epf" epf:version="1.5.0" xmlns:rmc="http://www.ibm.com/rmc" |
| rmc:version="7.5.0" xmi:id="-HQSI39vBrjpmQL1qHYOJtA" |
| name="new_checklist,_nnSXcD6SEduAL-bCqar_dg" guid="-HQSI39vBrjpmQL1qHYOJtA" version="1.0.0"> |
| <sections xmi:id="_sG8ZoD6SEduAL-bCqar_dg" name="Packages and Organization" guid="_sG8ZoD6SEduAL-bCqar_dg"> |
| <sectionDescription><p>
 |
| Is the package partitioning logical and consistent? Does it make sense to team members and stakeholders?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Do package names accurately describe the contents of the package and the role they play in the architecture? Do they
 |
| follow naming conventions?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Do public packages and interfaces provide a logically cohesive set of services?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are all the contents of a package listed? Are the classes within a package cohesive?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Do package dependencies correspond to the dependencies of the contained classes?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are there packages or classes within a package that can be separated into and independent or sub-package?<br />
 |
| </p></sectionDescription> |
| </sections> |
| <sections xmi:id="_tx6tsD6SEduAL-bCqar_dg" name="Views" guid="_tx6tsD6SEduAL-bCqar_dg"> |
| <sectionDescription><p>
 |
| Does each diagram help the designer reason about the design, or communicate key design decisions to the team?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are the relationships between diagrams clear when several diagrams are used to describe behavior?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Is it easy to navigate between related diagrams?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does each diagram focus on a relevant perspective? For instance, does a set of diagrams show a single class and its
 |
| direct relationships, rather than using&nbsp;one or two diagrams to show all classes?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Is each diagram complete and minimal? Does it show everything relevant to that view and nothing more?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are the diagrams tidy and easy to interpret, with a minimum of clutter?
 |
| </p></sectionDescription> |
| </sections> |
| <sections xmi:id="_yeFh4D6SEduAL-bCqar_dg" name="UML" guid="_yeFh4D6SEduAL-bCqar_dg"> |
| <sectionDescription><p>
 |
| Does the visual model conform to UML standards so all stakeholders can understand the model over time? See the&nbsp;<a
 |
| href="http://www.uml.org/" target="_blank">OMG UML Resource Page</a>&nbsp;for more information.
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does the visual model conform to project or organization specific modeling standards?
 |
| </p>Is the visual model internally consistent? For instance, if an object diagram shows a relationship between objects,
 |
| does a corresponding relationship exist between the appropriate classes?<br />
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does the name of each class clearly reflect the role it plays?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does each class offer the required behavior?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Is there at least one&nbsp;realization association defined for each interface? The realization may represent a 3rd
 |
| party implementation of the subsystem.
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are&nbsp;there dependency associations from each subsystem to the interfaces it uses?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Is each operation in a subsystem interface described in a sequence diagram? Or at least mapped directly to an operation
 |
| in a class?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does each class represent a single well defined abstraction?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are generalization relationships used only to inherit definitions, not behavior (implementation)? In other words, is
 |
| behavior shared through the use of association, aggregation and containment relationships instead of generalization?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are parent classes in generalization relationships abstract? Are the "leaf" classes in a generalization hierarchy the
 |
| only concrete classes?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are stereotypes used consistently and meaningfully?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Do&nbsp;statecharts exist for classes with complex or restrictive state changes?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Do relationships have descriptive role or association names (one or the other but not both), and&nbsp;correct
 |
| multiplicities?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are relationships between classes unidirectional whenever possible?<br />
 |
| &nbsp;
 |
| </p></sectionDescription> |
| </sections> |
| <sections xmi:id="_IsDY4D6TEduAL-bCqar_dg" name="Non-UML Visual Modeling" guid="_IsDY4D6TEduAL-bCqar_dg"> |
| <sectionDescription><p>
 |
| Are the semantics of the visual modeling language clearly defined, documented, and accessible to team members? The
 |
| semantics should be meaningful to the users of the model.
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Can the semantics of the modeling language be understood over time? Is the language documented well enough so that team
 |
| members can understand the model long after design decisions have taken place?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Are team members and stakeholders trained in the modeling language being used?
 |
| </p>
 |
| <p>
 |
| Does the visual model conform to the semantics of the visual modeling language? In other words, are the meanings
 |
| of&nbsp;the symbols in the diagrams&nbsp;consistent across the model and diagrams?&nbsp;
 |
| </p></sectionDescription> |
| </sections> |
| </org.eclipse.epf.uma:ContentDescription> |
