Are you lost when folks talk about "quality" in the context of software? Just when you thought "high quality" means "good" and "QA" means "assure it's good", somebody hits you over the head with ISO 25010, where "quality" is just a neutral property of a software system. It's all a big happy pile of terminology quicksand where you sink faster the more you struggle for unambiguous and clear definitions. But we're here to help you out. We'll be looking at what's relevant about quality from a software architecture perspective.

Target Audience: Architects, Developers
Prerequisites: None
Level: Basic

Extended Abstract:
Among the prominent confusions is "quality requirements" vs. "functional requirements" - someone is sure to tell you that the first one is something not entirely unlike “non-functional” requirements. But if that distinction even is a thing, what's that "functional suitability" category of the ISO 25010 quality model? And where exactly do requirements even enter the picture? Once they do, how do we tell whether they are satisfied or not? And if they're not, how does all this terminology help with devising tactics for making things better? We'll separate out the taxonomy from the metrology, the metrology from the requirements, the functional from the non-functional (as far as this makes sense) and everything in between. We'll survey different ways of looking at quality and identify the murky areas where you need to be explicit about what you mean.

Mehr Inhalte dieses Speakers? Schaut doch mal bei sigs.de vorbei: https://www.sigs.de/autor/michael.sperber