Applying visualisation techniques in software product lines

ABSTRACT

Software product lines of industrial size can easily incorporate thousands of variation points. This scale of variability can become extremely complex to manage resulting in a product development process that bears significant costs. One technique that can be applied beneficially in this context is visualisation. Visualisation is widely used in software engineering and has proven useful to amplify human cognition in data intensive applications. Adopting this technique in software product line engineering can help stakeholders in supporting essential work tasks and in enhancing their understanding of large and complex product lines.

The research presented in this paper describes an integrated meta-model and research tool that employs visualisation techniques to address significant software product line tasks such as variability management and product derivation. Examples of the tasks are described and the ways in which these tasks can be further supported by utilising visualisation techniques are explained.

REFERENCES

• 1: Michal Antkiewicz , Krzysztof Czarnecki, FeaturePlugin: feature modeling plug-in for Eclipse, Proceedings of the 2004 OOPSLA workshop on eclipse technology eXchange, p.67-72, October 24-24, 2004, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/1066129.1066143]
• 2: Timo Asikainen , Tomi Männistö , Timo Soininen, Kumbang: A domain ontology for modelling variability in software product families, Advanced Engineering Informatics, v.21 n.1, p.23-40, January, 2007 [doi>10.1016/j.aei.2006.11.007]
• 3: Beuche, D. 2004. Variants and variability management with pure::variants. In Proc. 3rd Software Product Line Conference (SPLC 2004), Workshop on Software Variability Management for Product Derivation.
• 4: Botterweck, G., Nestor, D., Preussner, A., Cawley, C., and Thiel, S. 2007. Towards supporting feature configuration by interactive visualisation. In Proc. 1st Int'l Workshop on Visualisation in Software Product Line Engineering (ViSPLE2007).
• 5: Goetz Botterweck , Liam O'Brien , Steffen Thiel, Model-driven derivation of product architectures, Proceedings of the twenty-second IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering, November 05-09, 2007, Atlanta, Georgia, USA [doi>10.1145/1321631.1321711]
• 6: Card, S. K., Nation, D., and Ui, D. V. 2002. Degree-of-interest trees:. In Proc. Advanced Visual Interfaces 2002, 231--245.
• 7: Clements, P., and Northrop, L. 2002. Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
• 8: Cockburn, A., and McKenzie, B. 2000. An evaluation of cone trees. In Proc. of the HCI'00 Conference on People and Computers XIV, Usability and System Evaluation, 425--436.
• 9: Czarnecki, K., and Antkiewicz, M. 2005. Mapping features to models: A template approach based on superimposed variants. In Proc GPCE 2005, Springer, R. Glück and M. R. Lowry, Eds., vol. 3676 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 422--437.
• 10: Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., and Eisenecker, U. W. 2004. Staged configuration using feature models. In Proc. of the Third Software Product Line Conference (SPLC 2004), 266--283.
• 11: Sybren Deelstra , Marco Sinnema , Jan Bosch, Product derivation in software product families: a case study, Journal of Systems and Software, v.74 n.2, p.173-194, 15 January 2005 [doi>10.1016/j.jss.2003.11.012]
• 12: G. W. Furnas, Generalized fisheye views, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.16-23, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 13: Emden R. Gansner , Stephen C. North, An open graph visualization system and its applications to software engineering, Software—Practice & Experience, v.30 n.11, p.1203-1233, Sept. 2000 [doi>10.1002/1097-024X(200009)30:11<1203::AID-SPE338>3.3.CO;2-E]
• 14: Halmans, G., and Pohl, K. 2004. Communicating the variability of a software-product family to customers. Inform, Forsch. Entwickl 18, 3--4, 113--131.
• 15: L. Hotz , K. Wolter , T. Krebs, Configuration in Industrial Product Families: The ConIPF Methodology, IOS Press, Inc., 2006
• 16: Janota, M., and Botterweck, G. 2008. Formal approach to integrating feature and architecture models. In Proc. Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE 2008).
• 17: Brian Johnson , Ben Shneiderman, Tree-Maps: a space-filling approach to the visualization of hierarchical information structures, Proceedings of the 2nd conference on Visualization '91, October 22-25, 1991, San Diego, California
• 18: Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J., Novak, W., and Peterson, S. 1990. Feature oriented domain analysis (foda) feasibility study. Tech. rep.
• 19: Kyo C. Kang , Jaejoon Lee , Patrick Donohoe, Feature-Oriented Project Line Engineering, IEEE Software, v.19 n.4, p.58-65, July 2002 [doi>10.1109/MS.2002.1020288]
• 20: Lisboa, L. B., Garcia, V. C., Almeida, E. S., and Meira, S. R. L., 2007. Toolday a process-centered domain analysis tool.
• 21: Liu, D., and Mei, H. 2003. Mapping requirements to software architecture by feature-orientation. In Proc. 2nd Int'l Software Requirements to Architectures Workshop, 69--76.
• 22: Jock Mackinlay, Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), v.5 n.2, p.110-141, April 1986 [doi>10.1145/22949.22950]
• 23: Catherine Plaisant , Jesse Grosjean , Benjamin B. Bederson, SpaceTree: Supporting Exploration in Large Node Link Tree, Design Evolution and Empirical Evaluation, Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis'02), p.57, October 28-29, 2002
• 24: Rabiser, R., Dhungana, D., and Grünbacher, P. 2007. Tool support for product derivation in large-scale product lines: A wizard-based approach. In Proc. 1st International Workshop on Visualization in Software Product Line Engineering (ViSPLE 2007).
• 25: George Robertson , Kim Cameron , Mary Czerwinski , Daniel Robbins, Polyarchy visualization: visualizing multiple intersecting hierarchies, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Changing our world, changing ourselves, April 20-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA [doi>10.1145/503376.503452]
• 26: Tonny Kurniadi Satyananda , Danhyung Lee , Sungwon Kang , Sajid Ibrahim Hashmi, Identifying Traceability between Feature Model and Software Architecture in Software Product Line using Formal Concept Analysis, Proceedings of the The 2007 International Conference Computational Science and its Applications, p.380-388, August 26-29, 2007 [doi>10.1109/ICCSA.2007.47]
• 27: SEI, 2008. Software product lines. online, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/productlines/.
• 28: Sellier, D., and Mannion, M. 2007. Visualizing product line requirement selection decisions. In Proc. 1st International Workshop on Visualization in Software Product Line Engineering (ViSPLE 2007).
• 29: Siegmund, N., Kuhlemann, M., Rosenmuller, M., Kaestner, C., and Saake, G. 2008. Integrated product line model for semi-automated product derivation using non-functional properties. In Proc. 2nd Int'l Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VAMOS).
• 30: Sinnema, M., de Graaf, O., and Bosch, J. 2004. Tool support for COVAMOF. In Workshop on Software Variability Management for Product Derivation.
• 31: Sinnema, M., Deelstra, S., Nijhuis, J., and Bosch, J. 2004. Covamof: A framework for modeling variability in software product families. In Proc. Third Software Product Line Conference, 197--213.
• 32: Sochos, P., Philippow, I., and Riebisch, M. 2004. Feature-oriented development of software product lines: Mapping feature models to the architecture. In Proc. Net. ObjectDays, Springer, M. Weske and P. Liggesmeyer, Eds., vol. 3263 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 138--152.
• 33: Steffen Thiel , Andreas Hein, Modeling and Using Product Line Variability in Automotive Systems, IEEE Software, v.19 n.4, p.66-72, July 2002 [doi>10.1109/MS.2002.1020289]
• 34: Jilles Van Gurp , Jan Bosch , Mikael Svahnberg, On the Notion of Variability in Software Product Lines, Proceedings of the Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, p.45, August 28-31, 2001 [doi>10.1109/WICSA.2001.948406]
• 35: Colin Ware, Information visualization: perception for design, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 2000

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.13 Reusable Software
            Subjects: Reuse models

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: Computer-aided software engineering (CASE)

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.3 COMPUTER GRAPHICS
      I.3.6 Methodology and Techniques
          Subjects: Interaction techniques

Keywords:
feature configuration, interaction, software product lines, visualisation