To: | Ian Bailey <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ontology Summit 2013 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:26:08 -0700 (PDT) |
Message-id: | <1363299968.24980.YahooMailNeo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Ian, I don;t want to repeat, but in In general for software development, a capability is a "feature" or a " function" or a "service" that the product or software is capable of providing. As you said, it is used at a strategic level and later mapped to requirements and systems and so forth. An use case specifies the usage. It is developed in futuristic way to help the designers to capture how that "feature" or a " function" or a "service" be used by the users ( actor or system when automated) and the behavior of the product or software. It is developed during detail requirement stage! Scenarios should capture all different ways that "feature" or a " function" or a "service" can be used and exceptions and error handling. Test cases should include all the scenarios with unique sets of data to capture all possible types of input and exceptions and error handling. Matrices are developed based on the correct behavior of the test cases .. 0 tolerance is one such matrix. It was part of RUP development life cycle.. . Rational Rose developed Use case modeling initially. They also supported Object Oriented Modeling and UML. hope that helps. Thanks, Pavithra From: Ian Bailey <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx>; Ontology Summit 2013 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Thank you. Folks, The concept of capability as a tool for strategic planning originates in the military. I think McKinsey did the original work on this in the 90s for UK MOD and also some work in US DoD. Capability is explicitly NOT about process. The whole idea is to allow strategic thinking without resorting to design of processes. Capabilities should be expressed in terms of outcomes - what, not how. Once you've worked out your capabilities, you can think about the processes and systems needed to deliver the capability. The concept has now found much wider use in the commercial world - see http://hbr.org/2010/06/the-coherence-premium/ar/1 and it also seems to have found a home in IT for portfolio management and application rationalisation, though whether those guys stick to the process-independence rule is somewhat questionable.
It's a very tricky concept to model in an ontology. In IDEAS we take the approach that a capability is the set of all possible things that are capable of achieving a particular outcome. Capabilities can have measures of effectiveness which constrain the members of the set. This approach seems to work for military architectures and strategic acquisition planning. We then have the concept of a capability configuration (people, systems and processes) that deliver the capability (these become subtypes of the capability) and finally fielded capabilities - physical things that are instances of the capability configuration and also therefore instances of the capability. MODAF works this, and I think DoDAF does too.
Chris Partridge did a lot of work on this for us - esp. around the dispositional aspects of capability. Regards
-- Ian Bailey
www.modelfutures.comwww.integrated-ea.com tel: +44 7768 892362
Model Futures Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 05248454 Registered Company Address: 1 Nelson Street, Southend-On-Sea, Essex, SS1 1EG
VAT Number: 848 7357 75, D-U-N-S Number : 73-998-0352 MOD FATS 4: FATS/4/MFL, DGFM Supplier Code: 56945
On 14 March 2013 19:44, Pavithra <pavithra_kenjige@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013 Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (01) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontology-summit] Thank you., Luciano, Joanne S. |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontology-summit] Thank you., Pavithra |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontology-summit] Your Welcome!, Joanne Luciano |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontology-summit] Dispositions [Was: Thank you.], Obrst, Leo J. |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |