A taxonomy of software types to facilitate search and evidence-based software engineering

ABSTRACT

Empirical software research could be improved if there was a systematic way to identify the types of software for which empirical evidence applies. This is because results are unlikely to be globally applicable, but are more likely to apply only in certain contexts such as the type of software on which the evidence has been tested. We present a software taxonomy that should help researchers to apply their research systematically to particular types of software. The taxonomy was generated using existing partial taxonomies and input from survey participants. If a taxonomy such as ours gains acceptance, it will facilitate comparison and appropriate application of research. In the paper, we present the benefits of such a taxonomy, the process we used to develop it, and the taxonomy itself.

REFERENCES

• 1: Yannis Tzitzikas , Nicolas Spyratos , Panos Constantopoulos, Mediators over taxonomy-based information sources, The VLDB Journal — The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases, v.14 n.1, p.112-136, March 2005 [doi>10.1007/s00778-003-0119-8]
• 2: Carl E. Landwehr , Alan R. Bull , John P. McDermott , William S. Choi, A taxonomy of computer program security flaws, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.26 n.3, p.211-254, Sept. 1994 [doi>10.1145/185403.185412]
• 3: Iris Vessey, Problems versus solutions: the role of the application domain in software, Papers presented at the seventh workshop on Empirical studies of programmers, p.233-240, October 1997, Alexandria, Virginia, United States [doi>10.1145/266399.266419]
• 4: I. Vessey, Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature, Decision Sciences 22 (2), 1991, pp. 219--240.
• 5: Robert L. Glass , Iris Vessey, Toward a taxonomy of software application domains: history, Journal of Systems and Software, v.17 n.2, p.189-199, Feb. 1992 [doi>10.1016/0164-1212(92)90095-2]
• 6: Robert L. Glass , Iris Vessey, Contemporary Application-Domain Taxonomies, IEEE Software, v.12 n.4, p.63-76, July 1995 [doi>10.1109/52.391837]
• 7: Jackson, M., "Problem frames and software engineering", Journal of Information and Software Technology, 2005, vol 47, no 14, Nov 2005, pp.903--912.
• 8: Michael Jackson, Problem frames: analyzing and structuring software development problems, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2000
• 9: Robert L. Glass, Matching methodology to problem domain, Communications of the ACM, v.47 n.5, May 2004 [doi>10.1145/986213.986228]
• 10: Forward A. Study: Building a software taxonomy. Retrieved 12/14, 2007, from http://cruise.site.uottawa.ca/awf/.
• 11: Forward A. Why build a software taxonomy? Retrieved 12/14, 2007, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqlnWIFZ 5BM.
• 12: Forward A. Tutorial - How to create a software taxonomy. Retrieved 12/14, 2007, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut2O8xze IMI.
• 13: Forward A. Latest software taxonomy. Retrieved 12/14, 2007, from http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/gradtheses/aforwardphd/Software%20Taxonomy.doc
• 14: Forward, A. Modeling survey data and software application taxonomy data available at http://site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/gradtheses/aforwardphd/.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
      K.6.3 Software Management

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.9 Management

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation