Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Summer 2013
Project Title:
Team 7
Ryan Wooten
Chris Wyland
Due Date
Tuesday 06/04/2013
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose 1
1.2 Scope 1
1.3 Definitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations 1
1.4 References 1
1.5 Overview 1
2. Overall Description 2
2. 1 Use-Case Model Survey 2
2.2 Assumptions and Dependencies 10
3. Specific Requirements 10
3.1 Classes/Objects 10
3.2 Object Collaboration Diagrams 14
3.3 Sequence Diagrams 15
3.4 Object Behavior Diagrams 22
3.5 Performance Requirements 22
3.6 Other Requirements 22
4. Supporting Information 22
Software Requirements Specification
1. Introduction
This Software Requirements Specification provides a complete description of all the functions and
specifications of the Road Repair Tracking System. The intended audience of this document includes the
development team, designers, coders, testers, as well as the SmallTown Department of Public Safety.
1.1 Purpose
The Software Requirements Specification will fully describe the behavior of the Road Repair Tracking
System. It will examine the restrictions of the systems, the assumptions of the environment, and the design
constraints to be considered.
1.2 Scope
This document will describe complete functionality of the Road Repait Racking System. It will cover the
assumptions, dependencies and constraints of the system. It will include use-case models, class and object
tables, as well as sequence diagrams.
1.3 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations
DoPS Department of Public Safety (of SmallTown)
Inspector DoPS employee responsible for inspecting pothole sites
Pothole Any damaged portion of the paved surface of a road that impedes driving
RRTS Road Repair Tracking System
SRS Software Requirements Specification
X (value of) The number of reports required about a pothole before it will be inspected. To be
determined by the DoPS.
1.4 References
None
1.5 Overview
The remainder of this document contains two chapters. The first lists the functions and constraints of the
system including use-case models. It will describe the user interactions with the system. The second
chapter specifies, in detail, the specification requirements. It also elaborates the design structure using
class tables and sequence diagrams.
<<extend>>
Login/Logout
View
Statistics / Analytics
Trigger:
A SmallTown citizen encounters a pothole and chooses to report it.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case ID 2
Typical flow of events:
1. The citizen accesses the front end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The citizen enters information into the porthole report fields in order to describe the encountered pothole.
2a. Optional – The citizen may upload a photo of the pothole.
2b. Optional – The citizen may fill in the damage report fields to report damages caused by the potholes.
3. The citizen submits the report.
Assumptions
Assume that the citizen reporting the pothole in fact came in contact with a valid pothole.
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
-The pothole reported must be reported on a valid street within the city limits of SmallTown.
-While a user/IP can report on as many potholes as he or she encounters, the user/IP can only report on any
particular pothole once.
Table 1 – Use-Case 1
Trigger:
When the precondition is met, the system will automatically notify the inspector that a pothole needs to be
inspected.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case ID 3
Typical flow of events:
1. The inspector accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The inspector enters his login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The inspector chooses to view the compiled report about the pothole needing inspection.
3a. Optional – The inspector may view the individual reports submitted about the pothole.
4. The inspector prints the compiled pothole report in order to visit the pothole site.
5. The inspector logs out.
Assumptions
None
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
None
Table 2 – Use-Case 2
Trigger:
The inspector visits the site to verify the accuracy of the pothole report.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case 4
Typical flow of events:
1. The inspector accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The inspector enters his login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The inspector chooses to view the compiled report about the pothole needing inspection.
3a. Optional – The inspector may view the individual reports submitted about the pothole.
4. The inspector authorizes a work order to be issued to repair the pothole.
4a. The inspector may alternatively choose to deny a work order for the pothole repair.
5. The inspector logs out.
Assumptions
Assume that the inspector has actually visited the site of the pothole to verify the accuracy of the report.
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
The budget of the DoPS will dictate whether or not many potholes will be repaired. Assuming a relatively
unlimited DoPS budget, any and all potholes can be repaired, however with a limited budget, only a certain
number of potholes will be able to be repaired, therefore constraining how many and which potholes a work
order can be issued for.
Table 3 – Use-Case 3
Trigger:
The inspector has authorized the repair of a pothole and the system has automatically issued a work order to a
work crew. Alternatively, if the inspector, after re-inspection, has chosen to reassign the work order, the system
has automatically re-issued the work order to a work crew.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case ID 5
Typical flow of events:
1. The work crew accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The work crew enters its login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The work crew chooses to view the work order.
4. The work crew prints the work order in order to begin work on the repairs.
5. The work crew logs out.
Assumptions
Assume that all crews in the system available for work have the personnel and equipment capable of repairing
potholes.
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
None
Table 4 – Use-Case 4
Trigger:
The work crew has complete the repair.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case ID 6
Typical flow of events:
1. The work crew accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The work crew enters its login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The work crew chooses to view the work order.
4. The work crew fills in a final report regarding the completion of work order, including items such as cost of
repair and any outstanding issues.
5. The work crew submits the final report.
6. The work crew logs out.
Assumptions
Assume that the work crew has actually repaired the pothole.
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
None
Table 5 – Use-Case 5
Use case name: Re-inspect Pothole After Repair ID: 6 Priority: Medium
Primary actor: DoPS Source: Work Order Use case type: Business
Interested Stakeholders:
SmallTown Citizens – Will benefit from the repair of potholes in SmallTown
Work Crew – Will benefit from knowing whether or not their repair is satisfactory to the DoPS or whether or not
it will require further work.
Brief description:
After inspecting the pothole site, the inspector will submit a report verifying the repair and commenting on the
quality of work. If the repair is not satisfactory, the work order will be resubmitted for further repair.
Precondition:
Use-Case ID 5 must have occurred.
Trigger:
The work crew of a work order has submitted its final report declaring the pothole repaired.
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: Use-Case ID 4
Typical flow of events:
1. The inspector accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The inspector enters his login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The inspector chooses to view the work order marked as complete.
4. The inspector marks the order as officially complete as per the DoPS.
4a. The inspector may mark the work order as incomplete, resubmitting the order to the system to be
re-assigned to a work crew.
5. The inspector logs out.
Assumptions
Assume that the inspector has in fact visited the site of the repaired pothole and completed his inspection.
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
None
Table 6 – Use-Case 6
Trigger:
None
Relationships:
Include: None
Extend: None
Typical flow of events:
1. The system administrator accesses the back end website by loading the address in an internet browser.
2. The inspector enters his login credentials and logs in.
2a. The username and/or password do not match the system information. Login is rejected.
3. The system administrator can access, view, and maintain any and all information in the system.
3a. The system administrator can view individual and compiles pothole reports.
3b. The system administrator can view open and close work orders.
3c. The system administrator can add, remove, or maintain work crews.
3d. The system administrator can view statistics and analytics (repairs, costs, damages, etc.).
4. The system administrator logs out.
Assumptions
None
Implementation Constraints and Specifications:
None
Table 7 – Use-Case 7
3.1 Classes/Objects
Citizen
-Name Pothole
-IP Map
-ID -Roads
Reads From
-Road
+Check Road
-Cross Road
-Damages
Consists Of
-Damages Description
-Pothole Is Inspected
Submits
-Pothole Is Repaired
-Pothole Is Re-Inspected
Database
Reads From
Reads From
Pothole Report +Read from Database
+Write to Database
-Username
-IP
-Road Work Order
-Cross Road
-Damages Reads From -ID
-Damages Description -Crew
-Image -Work Order Is Complete
-Repair Is Inspected
+Check User
+Check For Number Of Reports +Mark As Complete
+Mark As Re-Inspected
View Order /
Issue / View
Submit Report
Work Order
View Report
Work Crew
DoPS Personnel Logs In
Login Protocol
Logs In -ID
-Employee Name -Crew
-Date of Hire +Check User -Work Order Is Complete
-Is User Admin +Check Password -Repair Is Inspected
-Username +Assign Order
-Password
+Set User As Admin
+Change Password
Map
1:1
Reads From
Pothole
1:N
Submits
Consists Of
1:1
M:N
1:1
1:1
M:N
N:1
Reads From
Work Order
Issue / View
Work Order
View Report
M:N
View Order /
Submit Report
1:1
1:N
Submit Report
Check User
User Has Submitted
Report On This Pothole
Error Message:
Already Reported
User Has Not Submitted
Report On This Pothole
Pothole Exists
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
View Report
Compile Statistics
Request Information
Retrieve Information
Display Statistics
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
View Report
Compile Statistics
Request Information
Retrieve Information
Display Statistics
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
Request Information
Return Information
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
Request Information
Return Information
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
Request Information
Return Information
Re-assign Order
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Login
Verify User/Pass
Verified
Login Successful
View Any
System Information
Request Information
Return Information
Update DB Information
Not Verified
Login Failed
Retry
Add / Remove
Work Crew
Add / Remove
Administrator
View
Admin
Admin Screen Statistics /
Logout
Analytics
If Admin:
Work Crew
Login Valid
Login Info
System Admin
Login Info If Inspector / Work Crew:
Login Valid
Compile
Pothole Report
Report
Inspector / Crew Create
View Order Work Order
Work Order
Citizen
Final Report Re-inspect Reports Pothole
After Repair After Repair