Individual (Cheng)

The evaluation strategy for the SAAM is from mapping change to scenarios that can present
in future change. In order to change the architecture model change into scenario can make it
understand for everyone. Such as developer, evaluation team, project leaders, stakeholders and others.
The information that analysis by produce a mapping that shows how the architectural approaches that
can work for the desired quality attribute. The mapping of approaches to attributes can constitute the
bulk of such a description. Example, the evaluation team that the mapping from the architecture
model that can be analysis by the description so that can change into architecture scenario that can be
present. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Second evaluation strategy understands of the function of the system. The evaluation teams
will be testing the completed system done by the developer. After the testing, the project team will be
present to the customers and stakeholders. So that can make them more familiar to their product.
Example, after the developer done the project, they inform the evaluation team for the testing. Then,
the project team can present it to the customers and stakeholders. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Third evaluation strategy is to contrast of multiple architecture with respect to the amount of
the function that can support each other by without any modification the system. This not only can
support the function of the system by can be maintain, security, can be repair after the system failure.
Example, when the customer orders the foods by using the system. The system suddenly server
breakdown, the server can be repair by a few minutes. So that the customer ordering some food wont
take too long. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

First step of SAAM evaluation is developing scenarios. This step is to show the activities that
the system can be function and support, change that customer the system that they want and ensure
the customers and stake holders can satisfy the function that they wanted. Example, the evaluation
teams call for the meeting with project teams, developing teams, stakeholders and others. So that they
can make sure the system can function and support and also to make them satisfy and also can ask
them whether want to change or add more function they wanted. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Second step of SAAM evaluation is to describe the architecture. This step is to use the
notation that understand by all teams include stakeholders and customer. That can be show the system
computation and data components as well as all relevant connection between the systems. The meta
data should be provide all the notation, computation and data components for the system. This can be
take the form of a natural-language specification of the overall behaviour or some other more formal
specification. Example, the evaluation teams describe the architecture model that they develop so that
its time to present to the stakeholders and customers by using the notations note. Later on, it also can
be show the computation and data components that can be connection between the systems. (Paul C,
Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Third step of SAAM evaluation is to classify and prioritise the scenarios. The evaluation
teams must find the direct scenarios from the architecture model. The direct scenarios are
representative as a metric for the architectures performance or reliability. If cant identify any direct
scenarios then will try to find the indirect scenarios from the architecture model. An indirect scenario
is that sequence of events for which realization or completed the architecture must make minor or
major changes. As the result can be define by the entire stakeholder and their concern. The
prioritization of the scenarios is based on a voting by the representative of the teams. Example,
evaluation teams will find any direct or indirect scenarios from the architecture model. And then the
representative of the teams will be voting whether the scenarios can be used. Direct scenario can when
the customer register the account the format must be DD/MM/YYYY. When enter the data, the data
should be 20/12/1997 so that it is valid. If someone type 20/12/1997 like this format consider invalid
in the data. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Fourth step of SAAM evaluation is evaluated for the indirect scenarios. After the scenarios
have been selected and the architectural description has been done. After the description done, the
evaluation tem need to change the scenario by referring the architecture model. The scenario that they
done can be understood by the stakeholders. The scenario that they change the architecture will be
listed and the cost of performing the change can be established. Example, the evaluation teams will be
doing the architecture description after the scenario has been selected. The representative of the team
will be representative to whether need to change the scenario make sure that the stakeholders must
understand. So that the listed of change the architecture and cost can be established. (Paul C, Rick K
& Mark K, 2002)

Scenario Scenario Direct / Required Number of Effort for

Number Description Indirect changes changed / changes
Added (Estimated)
components
1 Change the Indirect Attraction 1 1 person and
underlying interface to one month
LAN for data repertory
communication
to WAN
2 Change the Indirect The agent for 2 1 person and
data structure the affect one day
of an entity entity
 Fifth step of SAAM evaluation is all the scenarios require to integration into single
component. It will integrate all the function to the product function. It reveals the architecture is not
documented to the level of structural decomposition. Examples, after all the scenarios have been
identify. The scenario interaction has been revealing the separate of the components. It can lead to
structural complexity. Then the documentation part can be done in structural decomposition. The
scenario interacts with the component that can be decomposing into smaller sub-components that do
not exist in scenario information. (Paul C, Rick K & Mark K, 2002)

Sixth step of SAAM evaluation is create the overall evaluation. Each scenario will be
evaluated and assigned. The evaluation can be back to meet the goals. Evaluation must be process but
should follow some structured where the evaluation can be discuss whether it perfect or fail. Example,
evaluation team will be discuss each scenario that whether it meets the goal of the system. Then, the
evaluation teams will held a meeting with project teams, developer teams, customers, stakeholders
and others. Finally, the customers will be decided whether the system that is perfect or fail. (Paul C,
Rick K & Mark K, 2002)