Skip Navigation

The Computer Journal 1991 34(2):143-152; doi:10.1093/comjnl/34.2.143
© 1991 by British Computer Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tse, T. H.
Right arrow Articles by Pong, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

An Examination of Requirements Specification Languages*

T. H. Tse and L. Pong §

Department of Computer Science, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong,IBM, Canada

In this paper we examine the features which are most desirable in requirements specification languages, and then use the framework to review six established languages: PSL, SADT, EDDA, SAMM, HOS and RSL.

Received February 1989. revised November 1989.

* Part of this research was done at the London School of Economics, University of London under a Commonwealth Academic Staff Scholarship. The research was also supported in part by a Hong Kong and China Gas Research Grant and a University of Hong Kong Research and Conference Grant.

§ Currently with IBM, Canada.

Department of Computer Science, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.