Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
Methods for enterprise architecture, such as TOGAF, acknowledge the importance of requirements engineering in the development of enterprise architectures. Modelling support is needed to specify, document, communicate and reason about goals and requirements. Current modelling techniques for enterprise architecture focus on the products, services, processes and applications of an enterprise. In addition, techniques may be provided to describe structured requirements lists and use cases. Little support is available however for modelling the underlying motivation of enterprise architectures in terms of stakeholder concerns and the high-level goals that address these concerns. This paper describes a language that supports the modelling of this motivation. The definition of the language is based on existing work on high-level goal and requirements modelling and is aligned with an existing standard for enterprise modelling: the ArchiMate language. Furthermore, the paper illustrates how enterprise architecture can benefit from analysis techniques in the requirements domain. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1109/EDOC.2009.22 | EDOC |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
requirements engineering,modelling support,enterprise architecture focus,goal-oriented requirements,enterprise architecture,requirements domain,enterprise modelling,requirements list,goal-oriented requirement,current modelling technique,high-level goal,archimate language,computer architecture,data mining,use case,formal specification,business,requirement engineering | Enterprise architecture,Software engineering,Systems engineering,Computer science,Enterprise systems engineering,Enterprise modelling,NIST Enterprise Architecture Model,Enterprise architecture framework,Enterprise integration,Enterprise life cycle,Enterprise architecture management | Conference |
ISSN | Citations | PageRank |
2325-6354 | 27 | 1.10 |
References | Authors | |
20 | 4 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Dick A. C. Quartel | 1 | 352 | 32.78 |
Wilco Engelsman | 2 | 129 | 9.05 |
Henk Jonkers | 3 | 435 | 27.11 |
Marten Van Sinderen | 4 | 1450 | 189.82 |