The base class of stereotype <<QoSCharacteristic>> is Class. Properties and Structural Features with stereotype

<<QoSDimension>> provide support for the quantification of characteristics. The base classes of

<<QoSDimension>> are StructuralFeature and Property. The types for QoSDimensions are UML 2.0 primitive types,

enumerations, or QoS Characteristics. The metaclass Class included *Change in un* metamodel:

Qos Contract: second sentence is not a complete sentence.

The non-normative OMG document ptc/06-11-04 (06-11-04.uml2) includes a reference to a non-existent document (ecore.uml2).

In the "uml:Package" named "uml2", we have a "uml:Class" named "Element" that have a generalization reference to a "uml:Class"
href="../../eclipse/workspace2/MetaModels2/model/ecore.uml2#_Ui5E27hiEdqpTJOL-CJ2eQ".

This reference seems to be specific to a particular environment where the document 06-11-04.uml2 was exported. The reference needs to be updated to an existent one.

catastrophic is misspelled. Cannot edit the figure as is, needs to be fixed in the original figure.

Figure 11-9 SWOT Profile
Use Case is not listed in the figure.

Quality levels express the quantifiable level of satisfaction of a non-functional property. An RCC can associate quality

levels to its facets and event sinks. These quality levels are the RCC** remove 's ** quality provided contracts.

No Data Available

The facets, receptacles, event sinks, and event sources interconnect the RCC group, which collaborate to provide support of QASF. They support QASF transforming input data and events into output data and events. The QASF are the external QoS system operations, which have a quality utility associated that express the degree of satisfaction of the operation, from the user or external system point of view. The quality utility is expressed in terms of quality types and quality constraints. The grouped RCC are not quality independent in the sense that their configuration and quality provided in

their facets and event sink may limit the quality behavior of another RCC. The end-to-end quality of a qualified functionality depends on the sequence of transformations developed along the RCC sequence. For example, the end-to end latency of a video signal transformation depends on the latency of all RCC*insert s* involved in the transformation operation.

No Data Available

The attribute Qualification specifies the strictness of the constraint. The values are: Guarantee, ** chage Best Bets**-Effort, Threshold-Best-Effort, Compulsory-Best-Effort, and none.

No Data Available

QoS Contract: The quality provider specifies the quality values it can support (provider- Offered QoS) and the

requirements that must achieve its clients (provider-Required QoS). And the user, the quality it requires (client-

Required QoS), and the quality that it ensures (client-Offered QoS). ** this is not a sentence Finally**, in an assembly process, we must

establish an agreement between all constraints.

No Data Available

QoS Constraint: This is an abstract metaclass. A QoS Constraint limits the allowed values of one or more QoSCharacteristics. The QoS Constraints define the constraints of the QoS Characteristics of modeling elements. Application requirements or architectural decisions limit the allowed values of quality and the QoS Constraints

describe these limitations. QoS Context defines the QoS Characteristics and functional elements involved in a QoS Constraint. The QoS Context establishes the vocabulary of the constraint, and the QoS Constraint ** remove the** allowed values.

No Data Available

A QoS Context is described with QoS Characteristics or with the combination of other QoS Context*inser s. This means that a QoS Context that does not include **insert an*other QoS Context must be defined in terms of QoS Characteristics:

No Data Available

The characteristics of quality and their parameters are based on two types of concerns: i) user satisfaction, ** remove these** parameters are based on the user or client

No Data Available

Most modeling languages provide support for the description of functional behavior, they describe ** remove the** non-functional requirement*include s* merely using simple comments or informal structures. An example are the interfaces that provide support for the description of functional services in some modeling and interface description languages, but they do not specify nonfunctional properties of implementators. When a client defines a dependency of these interfaces, it has no information about the quality properties.

No Data Available

QoS specification languages are based on a set of constructors that provide support to describe the main QoS elements of the problem. Nevertheless, the model requires a general reference architecture. We are going to consider the QoS specification for two different abstraction levels: QoS application analysis and QoS application architecture. In the first case we analyze the QoS of the system** remove s**

No Data Available

The function ** chage does ** the quality characterization of software components or the entire system, where qi are the quality attributes of other components or external environment that affect *remove to* the quality of this component (input), r are

No Data Available

QoS Value and QoS Characteristics are specializations of QoS** change c to C** haracteristics and QoSValue

No Data Available

QoS Value: QoS Characteristics and QoS Context provide support for the description of quantifiable QoS values. However, often there are some QoS specific values identifiable at modeling time (e.g., limits of characteristics, or specific QoS values). QoS Value instantiate** insert s** QoS Characteristic and fixes it with specific values of its value definitions (QoS DimensionSlot). When we attach a QoS Value to a model element, we are characterizing the element with quality values

No Data Available

Update names in roles of QoS Metamodel to use the same name styles as in UML2 metamodels

No Data Available

QoSCompoundConstraint does not have associated a stereotype in the profile. It must be represented with some

Other QoSConstraint stereotypes, but this creates imprecision. Specific stereotype is needed to avoid this.

No Data Available

QoSRequired and QoSContract constraint based on QoS4SADemand can annotate UML 2.0 Messages, Control Flows,

Associations, and Transitions for the description of frequencies of demand of services. These UML elements have

associated implicitly or explicitly request of services from a client to a service provider, and the QoS Constraints provide

additional information for the temporal distribution of the invocations. ** Change QoS4SADemand** QoS4SADeamand include some dimensions that

No Data Available

Figure A-1**insert space ** includes the concepts of resource and resource services.

No Data Available

As seen in Figure 11-9, SWOTElement is modeled as ** Don't see this use case in the figure below UseCase** and EnterpriseAsset as Classifier.

No Data Available

QoS Metamodels in the FTF does not include relations of metaclasses and metaclasses in UML2.

This approach allows using QoS repositories in UML2 independent environments (e.g. non-UML2 QoS-aware

Modeling languages), but to do provide details about how to integrate QoS metamodels and UML2 metamodels.

Relations from QoS matamodel to UML2 would provide details about the integration of both modeling languages.

No Data Available