<?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/1.0.3/uma.ecore" epf:version="1.0.0" xmi:id="-T2IeqdOunweffIDgL-aM0w" name="use_case,_0Vk8cMlgEdmt3adZL5Dmdw" guid="-T2IeqdOunweffIDgL-aM0w" authors="Paul Bramble" changeDate="2006-05-01T13:13:56.264-0400" version="0.1">
  <copyrightStatement href="uma://_WCUhAO8KEdmKSqa_gSYthg#_uuunoPsDEdmyhNQr5STrZQ"/>
  <sections xmi:id="_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA" name="Is the use-case name meaningful and un-ambiguous?" guid="_663wMNk1Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Does the use case have a unique name?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is the name a verb + noun phrase (for example, Withdraw Cash)?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does the name accurately&amp;nbsp;summarize the&amp;nbsp;main goal&amp;nbsp;of the use case?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is the name &quot;actor independent&quot;?
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ" name="Does the brief description clearly describe the primary goal of the use case?" guid="_ZTA8QJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Is it clear from the brief description what the main purpose of the use case is?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is the &quot;observable result of value&quot; obvious?
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ" name="Are associated actors and information exchanged clearly defined?" guid="_4wJRgJznEduBcbjYtLtItQ">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Is the use case associated with one or more actors?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is the primary, or initiating actor, defined?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is it clear who wishes to perform the use case?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is all information exchanged between the actor(s) and the system clearly specified?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    If a &quot;time&quot; actor is used, are you sure you did not miss an important actor and associated use cases (such as
    administrative or maintenance personnel that define schedule events)?
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA" name="Are the pre-conditions specified?" guid="_Qys_INk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Does each pre-condition represent a tangible&amp;nbsp;state&amp;nbsp;of&amp;nbsp;the system (for example, the Withdraw Cash use
    case for an automated teller machine has a precondition that the user has an account)?
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA" name="Are the Basic Flow and Alternate Flows complete, correct and consistent?" guid="_q3qV0Nk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Is it clear how the use case is started?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is the triggering event clearly described?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does the flow have a definite ending?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does&amp;nbsp;each step in the scenario contain&amp;nbsp;the same level of abstraction?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does each step in the scenario describe something that can actually happen and that the system can reasonably detect?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does each step make&amp;nbsp;progress towards the goal?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    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 case conform to the user's expectations?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Does each step describe how the step helps the actor achieve their goal?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Is each step technology independent? Is it free of technical details, and design decisions?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Are the steps correctly numbered?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    For each alternate flow is the condition(s) for initiation of the flow clearly defined?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    For each alternate flow is it clear how the use case ends or where in the basic flow that the use case resumes?
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA" name="Are the post-conditions specified?" guid="_dnLXMNk2Edq2Q8qZoWbvGA">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    If &quot;Minimal Guarantees&quot; are present, do they always happen when the use case completes, regardless of success? (A
    Minimal Guarantee represents&amp;nbsp;a condition&amp;nbsp;that will be true when the use case ends, regardless of how it
    terminates.)
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    If &quot;Success Guarantees&quot; 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.)
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
  <sections xmi:id="_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ" name="Are applicable non-functional requirements captured?" guid="_vkbMAJzrEduBcbjYtLtItQ">
    <sectionDescription>&lt;p&gt;
    Are non-functional requirements (such as performance criteria) that are&amp;nbsp;applicable to the&amp;nbsp;use case captured
    in the use case?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
    Are these non-functional requirements applicable to many use cases?&amp;nbsp; It they are, consider capturing them in the
    supporting requirements specification to simplify maintenance.
&lt;/p&gt;</sectionDescription>
  </sections>
</org.eclipse.epf.uma:ContentDescription>