CHAPTER- DESIGN METHOGOLGY AND TECHNIQUES Structured Systems Analysis and Design Structured Systems Analysis and Design

Method (SSADM) is a systems approach to the analysis and design of information systems. SSADM was produced for the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (now Office of Government Commerce), a UK government office concerned with the use of technology in government, from 1980 onwards SSADM is a waterfall method for the analysis and design of information systems. SSADM can be thought to represent a pinnacle of the rigorous document-led approach to system design, and contrasts with more contemporary agile methods such as DSDM or Scrum. SSADM is one particular implementation and builds on the work of different schools of structured analysis and development methods, such as Peter Checkland's Soft Systems Methodology, Larry Constantine's Structured Design, Edward Yourdon's Yourdon Structured Method, Michael A. Jackson's Jackson Structured Programming, and Tom DeMarco's Structured Analysis. The names "Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method" and "SSADM" are registered trademarks of the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), which is an office of the United Kingdom's Treasury.

SSADM techniques
The three most important techniques that are used in SSADM are: 1.Logical Data Modeling This is the process of identifying, modeling and documenting the data requirements of the system being designed. The data are separated into entities (things about which a business needs to record information) and relationships (the associations between the entities). 2.Data Flow Modeling This is the process of identifying, modeling and documenting how data moves around an information system. Data Flow Modeling examines processes (activities that transform data from one form to another),

data stores (the holding areas for data), external entities (what sends data into a system or receives data from a system), and data flows (routes by which data can flow).

3. Entity Behavior Modeling This is the process of identifying, modeling and documenting the events that affect each entity and the sequence in which these events occur. The SSADM method involves the application of a sequence of analysis, documentation and design tasks concerned with the following Stage 0 - Feasibility study In order to determine whether or not a given project is feasible, there must be some form of investigation into the goals and implications of the project. For very small scale projects this may not be necessary at all as the scope of the project is easily understood. In larger projects, the feasibility may be done but in an informal sense, either because there is not time for a formal study or because the project is a must-have and will have to be done one way or the other. When a feasibility study is carried out, there are four main areas of consideration: Technical - is the project technically possible? Financial - can the business afford to carry out the project? Organizational - will the new system be compatible with existing practices? Ethical - is the impact of the new system socially acceptable?

To answer these questions, the feasibility study is effectively a condensed version of a fully blown systems analysis and design. The requirements and users are analyzed to some extent, some business options are drawn up and even some details of the technical implementation.

The product of this stage is a formal feasibility study document. SSADM specifies the sections that the study should contain including any preliminary models that have been constructed and also details of rejected options and the reasons for their rejection. Stage 1 - Investigation of the current environment This is one of the most important stages of SSADM. The developers of SSADM understood that though the tasks and objectives of a new system may be radically different from the old system, the underlying data will probably change very little. By coming to a full understanding of the data requirements at an early stage, the remaining analysis and design stages can be built up on a firm foundation. In almost all cases there is some form of current system even if it is entirely composed of people and paper. Through a combination of interviewing employees, circulating questionnaires, observations and existing documentation, the analyst comes to full understanding of the system as it is at the start of the project. This serves many purposes: the analyst learns the terminology of the business, what users do and how they do it the old system provides the core requirements for the new system faults, errors and areas of inefficiency are highlighted and their correction added to the requirements the data model can be constructed the users become involved and learn the techniques and models of the analyst the boundaries of the system can be defined

The products of this stage are: Users Catalog describing all the users of the system and how they interact with it Requirements Catalogs detailing all the requirements of the new system Current Services Description further composed of

Current environment logical data structure (ERD) Context diagram (DFD) Leveled set of DFDs for current logical system Full data dictionary including relationship between data stores and entities

To produce the models, the analyst works through the construction of the models as we have described. However, the first set of data-flow diagrams (DFDs) are the current physical model, that is, with full details of how the old system is implemented. The final version is the current logical model which is essentially the same as the current physical but with all reference to implementation removed together with any redundancies such as repetition of process or data. In the process of preparing the models, the analyst will discover the information that makes up the users and requirements catalogs. Stage 2 - Business system options Having investigated the current system, the analyst must decide on the overall design of the new system. To do this, he or she, using the outputs of the previous stage, develops a set of business system options. These are different ways in which the new system could be produced varying from doing nothing to throwing out the old system entirely and building an entirely new one. The analyst may hold a brainstorming session so that as many and various ideas as possible are generated. The ideas are then collected to form a set of two or three different options which are presented to the user. The options consider the following:

the degree of automation the boundary between the system and the users the distribution of the system, for example, is it centralized to one office or spread out across several?

cost/benefit impact of the new system

Where necessary, the option will be documented with a logical data structure and a level 1 dataflow diagram. The users and analyst together choose a single business option. This may be one of the ones already defined or may be a synthesis of different aspects of the existing options. The output of this stage is the single selected business option together with all the outputs of stage 1. Stage 3 - Requirements specification This is probably the most complex stage in SSADM. Using the requirements developed in stage 1 and working within the framework of the selected business option, the analyst must develop a full logical specification of what the new system must do. The specification must be free from error, ambiguity and inconsistency. By logical, we mean that the specification does not say how the system will be implemented but rather describes what the system will do. To produce the logical specification, the analyst builds the required logical models for both the data-flow diagrams (DFDs) and the entity relationship diagrams (ERDs). These are used to produce function definitions of every function which the users will require of the system, entity life-histories (ELHs) and effect correspondence diagrams, these are models of how each event interacts with the system, a complement to entity life-histories. These are continually matched against the requirements and where necessary, the requirements are added to and completed. The product of this stage is a complete Requirements Specification document which is made up of: *the updated Data Catalog the updated Requirements Catalog the Processing Specification which in turn is made up of user role/function matrix function definitions required logical data model entity life-histories effect correspondence diagrams

Though some of these items may be unfamiliar to you, it is beyond the scope of this unit to go into them in great detail. Stage 4 - Technical system options This stage is the first towards a physical implementation of the new system. Like the Business System Options, in this stage a large number of options for the implementation of the new system are generated. This is honed down to two or three to present to the user from which the final option is chosen or synthesized. However, the considerations are quite different being: the hardware architectures the software to use the cost of the implementation the staffing required the physical limitations such as a space occupied by the system the distribution including any networks which that may require the overall format of the human computer interface

All of these aspects must also conform to any constraints imposed by the business such as available money and standardization of hardware and software. The output of this stage is a chosen technical system option. Stage 5 - Logical design Though the previous level specifies details of the implementation, the outputs of this stage are implementation-independent and concentrate on the requirements for the human computer interface. The logical design specifies the main methods of interaction in terms of menu structures and command structures. One area of activity is the definition of the user dialogues. These are the main interfaces with which the users will interact with the system. Other activities are concerned with analyzing both the effects of events in updating the system and the need to make inquiries about the data on the system. Both of these use the events, function descriptions and effect correspondence diagrams

produced in stage 3 to determine precisely how to update and read data in a consistent and secure way. The product of this stage is the logical design which is made up of: Data catalog Required logical data structure Logical process model -- includes dialogues and model for the update and inquiry processes Stress & Bending moment.

Stage 6 - Physical design This is the final stage where all the logical specifications of the system are converted to descriptions of the system in terms of real hardware and software. This is a very technical stage and a simple overview is presented here. The logical data structure is converted into a physical architecture in terms of database structures. The exact structure of the functions and how they are implemented is specified. The physical data structure is optimized where necessary to meet size and performance requirements. The product is a complete Physical Design which could tell software engineers how to build the system in specific details of hardware and software and to the appropriate standards. Advantages and disadvantages Using this methodology involves a significant undertaking which may not be suitable to all projects. The main advantages of SSADM are: Three different views of the system Mature Separation of logical and physical aspects of the system Well-defined techniques and documentation User involvement

The size of SSADM is a big hindrance to using it in all circumstances. There is a large investment in cost and time in training people to use the techniques. The learning curve is considerable as not only are there several modeling techniques to come to terms with, but there are also a lot of standards for the preparation and presentation of documents

Software development process

A software development process, also known as a software development life cycle (SDLC), is a structure imposed on the development of a software product. Similar terms include software life cycle and software process. It is often considered a subset of systems development life cycle. There are several models for such processes, each describing approaches to a variety of tasks or activities that take place during the process. Some people consider a lifecycle model a more general term and a software development process a more specific term. For example, there are many specific software development processes that 'fit' the spiral lifecycle model. ISO 12207 is an ISO standard for software lifecycle processes. It aims to be the standard that defines all the tasks required for developing and maintaining software. he large and growing body of software development organizations implement process methodologies. Many of them are in the defense industry, which in the U.S. requires a rating based on 'process models' to obtain contracts. The international standard for describing the method of selecting, implementing and monitoring the life cycle for software is ISO 12207. A decades-long goal has been to find repeatable, predictable processes that improve productivity and quality. Some try to systematize or formalize the seemingly unruly task of writing software. Others apply project management techniques to writing software. Without project management, software projects can easily be delivered late or over budget. With large numbers of software projects not meeting their expectations in terms of functionality, cost, or delivery schedule, effective project management appears to be lacking. Organizations may create a Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG), which is the focal point for process improvement. Composed of line practitioners who have varied skills, the group is at the center of the collaborative effort of everyone in the organization who is involved with software engineering process improvement.

Software development activities

The activities of the software development process represented in the waterfall model. There are several other models to represent this process. Planning An important task in creating a software product is extracting the requirements or requirements analysis. Customers typically have an abstract idea of what they want as an end result, but not what software should do. Incomplete, ambiguous, or even contradictory requirements are recognized by skilled and experienced software engineers at this point. Frequently demonstrating live code may help reduce the risk that the requirements are incorrect. Once the general requirements are gathered from the client, an analysis of the scope of the development should be determined and clearly stated. This is often called a scope document. Certain functionality may be out of scope of the project as a function of cost or as a result of unclear requirements at the start of development. If the development is done externally, this document can be considered a legal document so that if there are ever disputes, any ambiguity of what was promised to the client can be clarified. Implementation, testing and documenting Implementation is the part of the process where software engineers actually program the code for the project.

Software testing is an integral and important phase of the software development process. This part of the process ensures that defects are recognized as soon as possible. Documenting the internal design of software for the purpose of future maintenance and enhancement is done throughout development. This may also include the writing of an API, be it external or internal. The software engineering process chosen by the developing team will determine how much internal documentation (if any) is necessary. Plan-driven models (e.g., Waterfall) generally produce more documentation than Agile models. Deployment and maintenance Deployment starts after the code is appropriately tested, is approved for release and sold or otherwise distributed into a production environment. Software Training and Support is important and a lot of developers fail to realize that. It would not matter how much time and planning a development team puts into creating software if nobody in an organization ends up using it. People are often resistant to change and avoid venturing into an unfamiliar area, so as a part of the deployment phase, it is very important to have training classes for new clients of your software. Maintaining and enhancing software to cope with newly discovered problems or new requirements can take far more time than the initial development of the software. It may be necessary to add code that does not fit the original design to correct an unforeseen problem or it may be that a customer is requesting more functionality and code can be added to accommodate their requests. If the labor cost of the maintenance phase exceeds 25% of the prior-phases' labor cost, then it is likely that the overall quality of at least one prior phase is poor.[citation needed] In that case, management should consider the option of rebuilding the system (or portions) before maintenance cost is out of control. Software development models Several models exist to streamline the development process. Each one has its pros and cons, and it's up to the development team to adopt the most appropriate one for the project. Sometimes a combination of the models may be more suitable. Waterfall model The waterfall model shows a process, where developers are to follow these phases in order:

1. Requirements specification (Requirements analysis) 2. Software design 3. Implementation and Integration 4. Testing (or Validation) 5. Deployment (or Installation) 6. Maintenance

In a strict Waterfall model, after each phase is finished, it proceeds to the next one. Reviews may occur before moving to the next phase which allows for the possibility of changes (which may involve a formal change control process). Reviews may also be employed to ensure that the phase is indeed complete; the phase completion criteria are often referred to as a "gate" that the project must pass through to move to the next phase. Waterfall discourages revisiting and revising any prior phase once it's complete. This "inflexibility" in a pure Waterfall model has been a source of criticism by supporters of other more "flexible" models. Spiral model Spiral model The key characteristic of a Spiral model is risk management at regular stages in the development cycle. In 1988, Barry Boehm published a formal software system development "spiral model," which combines some key aspect of the waterfall model and rapid prototyping methodologies, but provided emphasis in a key area many felt had been neglected by other methodologies: deliberate iterative risk analysis, particularly suited to large-scale complex systems. The Spiral is visualized as a process passing through some number of iterations, with the four quadrant diagram representative of the following activities: 1. formulate plans to: identify software targets, selected to implement the program, clarify the project development restrictions; 2. Risk analysis: an analytical assessment of selected programs, to consider how to identify and eliminate risk; 3. the implementation of the project: the implementation of software development and verification;

Risk-driven spiral model, emphasizing the conditions of options and constraints in order to support software reuse, software quality can help as a special goal of integration into the product development. However, the spiral model has some restrictive conditions, as follows:
1. The spiral model emphasizes risk analysis, and thus requires

customers to accept this analysis and act on it. This requires both trust in the developer as well as the willingness to spend more to fix the issues, which is the reason why this model is often used for large-scale internal software development. 2. If the implementation of risk analysis will greatly affect the profits of the project, the spiral model should not be used. 3. Software developers have to actively look for possible risks, and analyze it accurately for the spiral model to work. The first stage is to formulate a plan to achieve the objectives with these constraints, and then strive to find and remove all potential risks through careful analysis and, if necessary, by constructing a prototype. If some risks can not be ruled out, the customer has to decide whether to terminate the project or to ignore the risks and continue anyway. Finally, the results are evaluated and the design of the next phase begins. Iterative and incremental development Main article: Iterative and incremental development Iterative development prescribes the construction of initially small but ever-larger portions of a software project to help all those involved to uncover important issues early before problems or faulty assumptions can lead to disaster. Agile development Agile software development Agile software development uses iterative development as a basis but advocates a lighter and more people-centric viewpoint than traditional approaches. Agile processes use feedback, rather than planning, as their primary control mechanism. The feedback is driven by regular tests and releases of the evolving software.

There are many variations of agile processes:

In Extreme Programming (XP), the phases are carried out in extremely small (or "continuous") steps compared to the older, "batch" processes. The (intentionally incomplete) first pass through the steps might take a day or a week, rather than the months or years of each complete step in the Waterfall model. First, one writes automated tests, to provide concrete goals for development. Next is coding (by a pair of programmers), which is complete when all the tests pass, and the programmers can't think of any more tests that are needed. Design and architecture emerge out of refactoring, and come after coding. Design is done by the same people who do the coding. (Only the last feature merging design and code is common to all the other agile processes.) The incomplete but functional system is deployed or demonstrated for (some subset of) the users (at least one of which is on the development team). At this point, the practitioners start again on writing tests for the next most important part of the system.

Scrum

Code and fix "Code and fix" development is not so much a deliberate strategy as an artifact of naivet and schedule pressure on software developers.[2] Without much of a design in the way, programmers immediately begin producing code. At some point, testing begins (often late in the development cycle), and the inevitable bugs must then be fixed before the product can be shipped. See also: Continuous integration Process improvement models Capability Maturity Model Integration The Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is one of the leading models and based on best practice. Independent assessments grade organizations on how well they follow their defined processes, not on

the quality of those processes or the software produced. CMMI has replaced CMM. ISO 9000 ISO 9000 describes standards for a formally organized process to manufacture a product and the methods of managing and monitoring progress. Although the standard was originally created for the manufacturing sector, ISO 9000 standards have been applied to software development as well. Like CMMI, certification with ISO 9000 does not guarantee the quality of the end result, only that formalized business processes have been followed. ISO 15504 ISO 15504, also known as Software Process Improvement Capability Determination (SPICE), is a "framework for the assessment of software processes". This standard is aimed at setting out a clear model for process comparison. SPICE is used much like CMMI. It models processes to manage, control, guide and monitor software development. This model is then used to measure what a development organization or project team actually does during software development. This information is analyzed to identify weaknesses and drive improvement. It also identifies strengths that can be continued or integrated into common practice for that organization or team. Formal methods Formal methods are mathematical approaches to solving software (and hardware) problems at the requirements, specification and design levels. Examples of formal methods include the BMethod, Petri nets, Automated theorem proving, RAISE and VDM. Various formal specification notations are available, such as the Z notation. More generally, automata theory can be used to build up and validate application behavior by designing a system of finite state machines.

Finite state machine (FSM) based methodologies allow executable software specification and bypassing of conventional coding (see virtual finite state machine or event driven finite state machine). Formal methods are most likely to be applied in avionics software, particularly where the software is safety critical. Software safety assurance standards, such as DO178B demand formal methods at the highest level of categorization (Level A). Formalization of software development is creeping in, in other places, with the application of Object Constraint Language (and specializations such as Java Modeling Language) and especially with Model-driven architecture allowing execution of designs, if not specifications. Another emerging trend in software development is to write a specification in some form of logic (usually a variation of FOL), and then to directly execute the logic as though it were a program. The OWL language, based on Description Logic, is an example. There is also work on mapping some version of English (or another natural language) automatically to and from logic, and executing the logic directly. Examples are Attempto Controlled English, and Internet Business Logic, which does not seek to control the vocabulary or syntax. A feature of systems that support bidirectional English-logic mapping and direct execution of the logic is that they can be made to explain their results, in English, at the business or scientific level. The Government Accountability Office, in a 2003 report on one of the Federal Aviation Administrations air traffic control modernization programs,[3] recommends following the agencys guidance for managing major acquisition systems by

establishing, maintaining, and controlling an accurate, valid, and current performance measurement baseline, which would include negotiating all authorized, unpriced work within 3 months;

conducting an integrated baseline review of any major contract modifications within 6 months; and

preparing a rigorous life-cycle cost estimate, including a risk assessment, in accordance with the Acquisition System Toolsets guidance and identifying the level of uncertainty inherent in the estimate.

Systems Development Life Cycle

The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC), or Software Development Life Cycle in systems engineering, information systems and software engineering, is a process of creating or altering information systems, and the models and methodologies that people use to develop these systems. In software engineering the SDLC concept underpins many kinds of software development methodologies. These methodologies form the framework for planning and controlling the creation of an information system[1]: the software development process.

Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a process used by a systems analyst to develop an information system, including requirements, validation, training, and user (stakeholder) ownership. Any SDLC should result in a high quality system that meets or exceeds customer expectations, reaches completion within time and cost estimates, works effectively and efficiently in the current and planned Information Technology infrastructure, and is inexpensive to maintain and cost-effective to enhance.[2] Computer systems are complex and often (especially with the recent rise of Service-Oriented Architecture) link multiple traditional systems potentially supplied by different software vendors. To manage this level of complexity, a number

of SDLC models or methodologies have been created, such as "waterfall"; "spiral"; "Agile software development"; "rapid prototyping"; "incremental"; and "synchronize and stabilize".[3] SDLC models can be described along a spectrum of agile to iterative to sequential. Agile methodologies, such as XP and Scrum, focus on lightweight processes which allow for rapid changes along the development cycle. Iterative methodologies, such as Rational Unified Process and Dynamic Systems Development Method, focus on limited project scope and expanding or improving products by multiple iterations. Sequential or big-design-up-front (BDUF) models, such as Waterfall, focus on complete and correct planning to guide large projects and risks to successful and predictable results[citation needed]. Other models, such as Anamorphic Development, tend to focus on a form of development that is guided by project scope and adaptive iterations of feature development. In project management a project can be defined both with a project life cycle (PLC) and an SDLC, during which slightly different activities occur. According to Taylor (2004) "the project life cycle encompasses all the activities of the project, while the systems development life cycle focuses on realizing the product requirements".[4] The Systems Life Cycle (SLC) is a methodology used to describe the process for building information systems, intended to develop information systems in a very deliberate, structured and methodical way, reiterating each stage of the life cycle. The systems development life cycle, according to Elliott & Strachan & Radford (2004), "originated in the 1960s,to develop large scale functional business systems in an age of large scale business conglomerates. Information systems activities revolved around heavy data processing and number crunching routines".[5] Several systems development frameworks have been partly based on SDLC, such as the Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) produced for the UK government Office of Government Commerce in the 1980s. Ever since, according to Elliott (2004), "the traditional life cycle approaches to systems development have been increasingly replaced with alternative approaches and frameworks, which attempted to overcome some of the inherent deficiencies of the traditional SDLC Systems development phases The System Development Life Cycle framework provides a sequence of activities for system designers and developers to follow. It consists of a set of steps or phases in which each phase of the SDLC uses the results of the previous one.

A Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) adheres to important phases that are essential for developers, such as planning, analysis, design, and implementation, and are explained in the section below. A number of system development life cycle (SDLC) models have been created: waterfall, fountain, spiral, build and fix, rapid prototyping, incremental, and synchronize and stabilize. The oldest of these, and the best known, is the waterfall model: a sequence of stages in which the output of each stage becomes the input for the next. These stages can be characterized and divided up in different ways, including the following

Project planning, feasibility study: Establishes a high-level view of the intended project and determines its goals.

Systems analysis, requirements definition: Defines project goals into defined functions and operation of the intended application. Analyzes end-user information needs.

Systems design: Describes desired features and operations in detail, including screen layouts, business rules, process diagrams, pseudocode and other documentation.

Implementation: The real code is written here. Integration and testing: Brings all the pieces together into a special testing environment, then checks for errors, bugs and interoperability.

Acceptance, installation, deployment: The final stage of initial development, where the software is put into production and runs actual business.

Maintenance: What happens during the rest of the software's life: changes, correction, additions, moves to a different computing platform and more. This, the least glamorous and perhaps most important step of all, goes on seemingly forever.

In the following example (see picture) these stage of the Systems Development Life Cycle are divided in ten steps from definition to creation and modification of IT work products:

System analysis The goal of system analysis is to determine where the problem is in an attempt to fix the system. This step involves breaking down the system in different pieces to analyze the situation, analyzing project goals, breaking down what needs to be created and attempting to engage users so that definite requirements can be defined. Requirements analysis sometimes requires individuals/teams from client as well as service provider sides to get detailed and accurate requirements; often there has to be a lot of communication to and from to understand these requirements. Requirement gathering is the most crucial aspect as many times communication gaps arise in this phase and this leads to validation errors and bugs in the software program. The part of the system Development Life Cycle with preliminary investigation which are made to understand the working of the existing system these investigation include the request system study,its clarification approval and the feasibility study of the system the system analysis collect the information of existing procedure and their working from this information find out the drawbacks in the system and finally present the solution of these problem

Design In systems design the design functions and operations are described in detail, including screen layouts, business rules, process diagrams and other documentation. The output of this stage will describe the new system as a collection of modules or subsystems. The design stage takes as its initial input the requirements identified in the approved requirements document. For each requirement, a set of one or more design elements will be produced as a result of interviews, workshops, and/or prototype efforts. Design elements describe the desired software features in detail, and generally include functional hierarchy diagrams, screen layout diagrams, tables of business rules, business process diagrams, pseudocode, and a complete entity-relationship diagram with a full data dictionary. These design elements are intended to describe the software in sufficient detail that skilled programmers may develop the software with minimal additional input design. Testing The code is tested at various levels in software testing. Unit, system and user acceptance testings are often performed. This is a grey area as many different opinions exist as to what the stages of testing are and how much if any iteration occurs. Iteration is not generally part of the waterfall model, but usually some occur at this stage. In the testing the whole system is test one by one Following are the types of testing:

Defect testing the failed scenarios, including defect tracking Path testing Data set testing Unit testing System testing Integration testing Black-box testing White-box testing Regression testing

Automation testing User acceptance testing Performance testing

Operations and maintenance The deployment of the system includes changes and enhancements before the decommissioning or sunset of the system. Maintaining the system is an important aspect of SDLC. As key personnel change positions in the organization, new changes will be implemented, which will require system updates. Systems Analysis and Design The Systems Analysis and Design (SAD) is the process of developing Information Systems (IS) that effectively use hardware, software, data, processes, and people to support the companys business objectives. Data flow diagram data flow diagram (DFD) is a graphical representation of the "flow" of data through an information system, modelling its process aspects. Often they are a preliminary step used to create an overview of the system which can later be elaborated.[2] DFDs can also be used for the visualization of data processing (structured design).

A DFD shows what kinds of data will be input to and output from the system, where the data will come from and go to, and where the data will be stored. It does not show information about the timing of processes, or information about whether processes will operate in sequence or in parallel (which is shown on a flowchart).

It is common practice to draw the context-level data flow diagram first, which shows the interaction between the system and external agents which act as data sources and data sinks. On the context diagram the system's interactions with the outside world are modelled purely in terms of data flows across the system boundary. The context diagram shows the entire system as a single process, and gives no clues as to its internal organization.

System Requirements Specification

A System Requirements Specification (sometimes known by the acronym, SyRS) A structured collection of information that embodies the requirements of a system. A Business analyst (BA), sometimes titled System analyst, is responsible for analyzing the business needs of their clients and stakeholders to help identify business problems and propose solutions. Within the systems development life cycle domain, the BA typically performs a liaison function between the business side of an enterprise and the information technology department or external service providers. Decision table Decision tables are a precise yet compact way to model complicated logic.[1] Decision tables, like flowcharts and if-then-else and switch-case statements, associate conditions with actions to perform, but in many cases do so in a more elegant way.

In the 1960s and 1970s a range of "decision table based" languages such as Filetab were popular for business programming. Each decision corresponds to a variable, relation or predicate whose possible values are listed among the condition alternatives. Each action is a procedure or operation to perform, and the entries specify whether (or in what order) the action is to be performed for the set of condition alternatives the entry corresponds to. Many decision tables include in their condition alternatives the don't care symbol, a hyphen. Using don't cares can simplify decision tables, especially when a given condition has little influence on the actions to be performed. In some cases, entire conditions thought to be important initially are found to be irrelevant when none of the conditions influence which actions are performed. Aside from the basic four quadrant structure, decision tables vary widely in the way the condition alternatives and action entries are represented.[2][3] Some decision tables use simple true/false values to represent the alternatives to a condition (akin to if-then-else), other tables may use numbered alternatives (akin to switch-case), and some tables even use fuzzy logic or probabilistic representations for condition alternatives.[4] In a similar way, action entries can simply represent whether an action is to be performed (check the actions to perform), or in more advanced decision tables, the sequencing of actions to perform (number the actions to perform). Example The limited-entry decision table is the simplest to describe. The condition alternatives are simple Boolean values, and the action entries are check-marks, representing which of the actions in a given column are to be performed. A technical support company writes a decision table to diagnose printer problems based upon symptoms described to them over the phone from their clients. The following is a balanced decision table. Printer troubleshooter Rules Conditio Printer does not print ns A red light is flashing Y Y Y Y N N N N Y Y N N Y Y N N

Printer is unrecognised Check the power cable Check the printer-computer cable Actions Ensure printer software is installed Check/replace ink Check for paper jam

Y N Y N Y N Y N X X X

X X X X

X X X X

Of course, this is just a simple example (and it does not necessarily correspond to the reality of printer troubleshooting), but even so, it demonstrates how decision tables can scale to several conditions with many possibilities.