SNet Tool

General Information

Tool Name

SNet Tool

Version

Group

RWTH Aachen University, Informatik 5 (Prof. Jarke) and the Knowledge Based Systems Group (Prof. Lakemeyer)

Web page (if available)

http://

Main Purpose of the Tool

Within this tool, the i* formalism is applied and extended in the context of a requirements engineering methodology to support inter-organizational networks. In particular, the tool provides an automatic transformation of graphical network representations (based on extended i*) into executable programs. Via this, network participants can simulate various network scenarios whose outcome may give valuable information regarding the risks and benefits of taking certain actions. The tool is intended to accompany the evolution of the real network continuously by modeling and simulation in order to recognize problems early and help the network define appropriate rules to handle them.

i* framework supported

Availability of the tool

• ( ) For i* modelling only
• ( ) For development only
• ( ) Both

If not available, please specify expected date of availability:

Programming Language

Platform Requirements

The tool is implemented as a plugin to the OME editor in combination with a separate Java program - the simulation viewer - providing graphical access to the simulations running in IndiGolog (itself running in Eclipse Prolog).

Other technology needed

• OME
• Eclipse Prolog
• IndiGolog interpreter

Current state of the tool

Ongoing work

i* Modelling Suitability

1. Does the tool allow SD modelling?

No

2. Does the tool allow SR modelling?

Yes

3. Does the tool allow working with SD & SR models jointly?

No

4. Does the tool allow the construction of the models graphically?

Yes / No
If so, please specify how (i.e., dragging and dropping the elements into a drawing page).

5. Does the tool allow the construction of the models textually?

Yes / No
If so, please specify how (i.e., filling a dependency table).

6. Describe how the elements are modelled and their flexibility (i.e., the elements can be moved and reordered).

7. Describe how the dependency links are modelled and their flexibility (i.e., dependencies are modelled with straight lines that can not be redirected).

8. Does the tool allow automatic organization of the elements?

Yes / No

9. Other modelling facilities provided by the tool:

• ...

10. Does the tool check SD models?

Yes / No
If so, please specify how (i.e., the tool checks if all the SD dependencies are assigned).

11. Does the tool check SR models?

Yes / No
If so, please specify how (i.e., checks if the SR links are correctly stated).

12. Other checks provided by the tool (i.e., cross validation between SD and SR models).

• ...

13. Does the tool allow working with two or more models at the same time?

Yes / No

14. Does the tool allow to group models in projects?

Yes / No

15. Does the tool allow working with two or more projects at the same time?

Yes / No

16. What are the other functionalities that the tool provides?

• ...

Usability

17. Rate the understandability of the user interface

• ( ) Internal use
• ( ) Ready for public use
• ( ) Has been used publicly

If it is not ready for public use, mark one or more of the following:

• ( ) not in English
• ( ) writing not polished
• ( ) poor usability (colours, ...)
• ( ) others: please specify

Expected date for public use (if any):

18. Rate the quality of the user manual

• ( ) Inexistent
• ( ) Internal use
• ( ) Ready for public use
• ( ) Has been used publicly

If user manual for internal use, mark one or more of the following:

• ( ) incomplete
• ( ) obsolete
• ( ) not in English
• ( ) writing not polished
• ( ) others: please specify

Expected date for public use (if any):

19. Does the tool provides i* learning facilities?

Yes / No
If so, explain which ones (i.e., methodological guidance).

20. Does the tool provide any examples for the users?

Yes / No

21. Rate the difficulty of installing the tool

• ( ) Copy files and initializing paths
• ( ) Copy files
• ( ) Executable installation file provided

Maturity of the Tool

22. Rate the maturity of the tool from the user point of view:

• ( ) Under Development
• ( ) Prototype
• ( ) Ready for public use
• ( ) Has been used publicly

If not for public use, mark one or more of the following:

• ( ) incomplete
• ( ) occasional testing
• ( ) non-exhaustive testing
• ( ) non-persistent data
• ( ) poor efficiency
• ( ) not portable
• ( ) others: please specify

Expected date for public use (if any):

23. Has the tool been used for any case study?

Yes / No
If so, specify which ones.

24. Has the tool been tested in large models?

Yes / No

25. Has the tool any drawback when working with very large models?

Yes / No
If so, which ones?

26. Which is approximately the maximum size of the model (in terms of actors and dependencies) the tool has been used for?

Extensibility and Interoperability

27. Does the tool allow importing files?

Yes / No
If so, specify import data formats (i.e., XML, text file, pictures of the graphical representation...)

28. Does the tool allow exporting files?

Yes / No
If so, specify import data formats (i.e., XML, text file, pictures of the graphical representation...)

29. Does the tool allow importing/exporting the data through an XML format?

Yes / No
If so, link to the DTD for the XML format if available.

30. Is the architecture of the tool published?

Yes / No
If so, where?

31. Does the tool allow the addition of other elements outside the i* framework of the tool?

Yes / No

32. New functionalities can be added to the tool by means of:

• ( ) PLUG-IN
• ( ) Open-Source code
• ( ) import & export XML
• ( ) NONE

33. Rate the maturity of the tool from for open development:

• ( ) Under Development
• ( ) Prototype
• ( ) Ready for public development use
• ( ) Has been used for public development

If not for public development use, mark one or more of the following:

• ( ) incomplete code
• ( ) no help provided
• ( ) non-persistent data
• ( ) non-exhaustive testing
• ( ) poor efficiency
• ( ) not portable
• ( ) no development installation facilities provided
• ( ) others: please specify

Expected date for public development use (if any):

34. Is there any internal documentation for programmers?

Yes / No
If so, enumerate the facilities provided

• ( ) Requirements specification and design decisions available
• ( ) Interface conventions
• ( ) Code conventions
• ( ) Full commented code
• ( ) Examples
• ( ) others: please specify