|
\begin{abstract} |
|
We have found some of the existing definitions of software qualities |
|
inadequate as a basis for conducting and presenting our software engineering |
|
research. Therefore, we have endeavored to create a list of definitions that |
|
are consistent (same words/phrases are always used for the same concepts), |
|
measurable (all qualities are conceptually measurable, even if the data needed |
|
for measurement is often unavailable), abstract (quality definitions state |
|
what the quality achieves, but not how to achieve it) and traceable (explicit |
|
links are given to all previous definitions and the ideas within those |
|
definitions). Our methodology starts with an exhaustive literature survey to |
|
find existing definitions. We then determine the recommended definition, |
|
which is either one of the existing definitions, or a new definition, found by |
|
combining existing definitions. Each recommended definition is accompanied by |
|
a rationale that explicitly justifies the definition. By presenting the |
|
rationales, we hope our software engineering colleagues will scrutinize our |
|
work and provide recommendations for future modifications. The qualities that |
|
are defined include installability, correctness, reliability, robustness, |
|
performance, usability, verifiability, validatability, testability, |
|
maintainability, reusability, portability, understandability, |
|
interoperability, productivity, visibility/transparency, reproducibility, |
|
sustainability, completeness, consistency, modifiability, traceability, |
|
unambiguity and abstract. Each quality is classified into one or more of the |
|
following categories: direct, indirect, internal, external, product or |
|
process. |
|
\end{abstract} |
