A study on the evaluation of package software documentation to improve software quality


The KIPS Transactions:PartD, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 629-638, Aug. 2002
10.3745/KIPSTD.2002.9.4.629,   PDF Download:

Abstract

As the application area of software grows bigger and the importance of software quality increases, software quality evaluation method is also getting a lot of attention. To evaluate the software quality properly, we need an objective and concrete evaluation mechanism. In general, practitioners customize the international standards to their own needs for this purpose. Package software documents play an important role in software quality evaluation because it provides the information that helps customers use the software effectively and conveniently. A great deal of efforts has been made in terms of international standards for documentation and documentation process. However, those international standards are too abstract to be applied directly to domestic software packages. In this paper, we developed a guidelines and checklists for writing and evaluating package software documents. Our research basically followed ISO 12119 , ISO 9127 and some related research results. Also we proved the effectiveness of this research through actual tests with package softwares.


Statistics
Show / Hide Statistics

Statistics (Cumulative Counts from September 1st, 2017)
Multiple requests among the same browser session are counted as one view.
If you mouse over a chart, the values of data points will be shown.


Cite this article
[IEEE Style]
H. Y. Kim, H. S. Kim, H. S. Han, S. Y. Kim, S. K. Shin, Y. E. Jung, "A study on the evaluation of package software documentation to improve software quality," The KIPS Transactions:PartD, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 629-638, 2002. DOI: 10.3745/KIPSTD.2002.9.4.629.

[ACM Style]
Hyo Young Kim, Han Saem Kim, Hyuk Soo Han, Soon Yong Kim, Seok Kyoo Shin, and Yung Eun Jung. 2002. A study on the evaluation of package software documentation to improve software quality. The KIPS Transactions:PartD, 9, 4, (2002), 629-638. DOI: 10.3745/KIPSTD.2002.9.4.629.