Requirements and AutoCounter

[TechWriter]

Hi there!

I'm new to EA and UML (have a very base Use Case understanding of UML) & hope there are some somebodies out there that can help...

I'm acting as a BA in a project, gathering business requirements and mapping business process of same.  I would like to only use EA for the documentation.  I am interested in separating out business requirements; functional and nonfunctional user requirements; functional and nonfunctional system requirements.

So far, I have done the following:

1.  Created the following Requirement Types using the Config/General Types/Requirements dialog box: Business Requirements, Functional Requirements and N-Functional Requirements

2.  Created the following stereotypes using the Config/UML/Stereotypes dialog box: Business Requirements (base class: comment); Functional Requirements (base class: comment) and N-Functional Requirements (base class:  comment).

I would like each Requirement Type to have its own naming and autonumbering scheme (example: BR001, FR001...)

Questions:
1.  Is this a good way to go about setting up the Requirements aspect of a project in EA?
2.  How would I go about adding a new stereotype (ex. my new Business Requirements stereotype) to the autocounter list box? I can see that "Requirement" is a supported type and is listed there.

Thanx for any forthcoming help!

[thomaskilian]

1.  Is this a good way to go about setting up the Requirements aspect of a project in EA?

It sounds quite reasonable. Of course it depends more on the project requirements than on EA supporting different techniques. If you feel that your stakeholders live well with that notation, keep it. Or discuss with them what could be improved.

2.  How would I go about adding a new stereotype (ex. my new Business Requirements stereotype) to the autocounter list box? I can see that "Requirement" is a supported type and is listed there.

More or less the same answer. You are free in adding more stereotypes. It might help to logically group requirements. However, I simply use packages for that purpose. The project view offers you a wide range to group requirements in a way your stakeholders can understand. For that reason I do not use stereotypes (except for the predefined ones like Printing, Display, etc.)

EA is very flexible in the way you can arrange your project. It will take several cycles until you find the methodology that fits your need best. Don't be afraid to change it while working on new projects.

[TechWriter]

Hi!

Thank you for the speedy reply.

I am setting up the requirements as packages...does this cancel out using stereotypes?

I'm still a bit confused about how to get any new items into that Auto Element Naming Type list box.  Is there a way?

Thank you!

[thomaskilian]

You can use packages and stereotypes concurrently. They give you two independent levels of structuring requirements.

The autocounters can olny be used per element, not per stereotyped element. So the drop down is fixed :-/. A more flexible approach to autoconnter has been requested by some users (me too), but unfortunately Sparx did not take it into account so far. If you need more flexibility it would be possible to work with an Add-In.

[Graham_Moir]

You may also want to look at RAQuest which is the EA add-in for requirements management.   Developed by Sparx Systems Japan.  Have a look at:

www.raquest.com

[TechWriter]

Thanks for the replies...and I will check out RaQuest.

[Rob_M]

If you use the auto counter feature -  I woiuld recommend placing it in the alias field and use the short description field for a short description of the requirement.

This is because it is a pain to edit alias fields for requirements due to their exclusion from the main popup dialog.

You can turn on the alias field so that it shows up on diagrams by selecting the 'use alias if available' option on the diagram properties.

Under Tools->Options  Diagram->Behavior, select "Alias and Name" to show both on the diagram.

Alas, I too have wished for counters based on element type and stereotype.

Rob