T Final demonstration Tetrastone-group [RosettaNet End-user Interface]

T Project Review 2 Agenda Project description (20 min)  Project stakeholders  The RosettaNet standard  RosettaNet End-User Interface  DEMO Project evaluation (15 min)  Summary of project progress  Problems encountered and solutions  Evaluation of final product  Evaluation of tools  Educational value Steering group’s comments and questions (5 min)

T Project Review 3 Project stakeholders Group: Mikko Savolainen- Project manager Kjell Holmberg - Systems Architect Mikael Riska - Process Manager Henry Niveri - Testing and quality manager Anssi Rajaniemi - User Interface Manager Kimmo Toivola - Risk manage Hanna Koivu - Document manager Customer: SOBERIT Paavo Kotinurmi- Customer Hannu Laesvuori- Technical advisor Mentor: Kenneth Westerdahl

T Project Review 4 RosettaNet standard “RosettaNet is one of the most promising eBusiness standards of today and several hundred leading international corporations such as Nokia, Siemens, Intel, etc. have already implemented it. RosettaNet's objective is to automate supply chain operations in the telecommunications, information technology and electrical components industries but so far only industry giants have progressed in the implementation. One weakness of RosettaNet seems to be its poor suitability for smaller enterprises.” - T Topic Overview: RosettaNet end user Interface ( /03-04/aiheet/kotinurmi.html ) /03-04/aiheet/kotinurmi.html

T Project Review 5 RosettaNet End-user Interface A web-based graphical user interface for RosettaNet PIP document exchanges. The core functionality is rendering PIP XML documents into human readable and updateable HTML forms. The HTML forms will be submitted, validated, transformed to new PIP XML documents and then sent to the trading partner. Both sent and received messages are stored in the message history for later retrieval and review. All outgoing messages are sent to the message gateway that will in turn forward it to the correct trading partner. All incoming messages are received from the message gateway.

T Project Review 6 RosettaNet End-user Interface RosettaNet End-User Interface : FINAL DEMO

T Project Review 7 Summary of Project progress 1/3 1. Project Planning - Gathering the group, agreeing on the project subject, getting in contact with the customer. -The project plan and the requirements specification 2. Iteration 1 -A first version of the Graphical User Interface -Technical specification -Hard to find time for the project as other courses were in critical phases

T Project Review 8 Summary of Project progress 2/3 3. Iteration 2 -The longest iteration with holidays in the middle -Communications problems noticed -Time and efforts estimations failed somewhat -More features implemented, but some of the goals could not be completed 4. Iteration 3 - Shorter iteration, but many hours done - More features - Implementation not finished 5. Delivery -Some features still added -Some requirements couldn’t be implemented -Lot of documentation done, including personal software engineering assignment reports

T Project Review 9 Summary of Project progress 3/3 PhaseMikkoKjellAnssiKimmoHenryMikaelHannaTotalReal PP ,5 I I ,2 I ,3 DE ,5 Total By Person: Person PPI1I2I3DETotal Anssi185278,535,511,5195,5 Hanna12, ,7523,5172,25 Henry175872,529, Kimmo23,54289,729,511,5196,2 Kjell406093, ,5 Mikko503555,530, Mikael34,53568,512,522172,5

T Project Review 10 Problems encountered and solutions Problems: Poor communication Lack of motivation Poor work and time estimates Solutions: Many solutions were tried, but nothing worked well Improve communication, meet more often Improve communication and make smaller tasks

T Project Review 11 Evaluation of final product Priority:Goal:Verification criteria: 1 Clear and modular structure of the program Group and customer evaluate this together 2Compatibility with the messaging gatewayCustomer evaluates if goal is completed 3Implementation of all user groupsCustomer evaluates if goal is completed 4Implementation of PIP 3A2Customer evaluates if goal is completed 5Implementation of PIP 2C5Customer evaluates if goal is completed 6Implementation of PIP 2C6Customer evaluates if goal is completed 7Implementation of PIP 2C4Customer evaluates if goal is completed 8Usability of GUI is goodGroup and customer evaluate this together 9 GUI is compatible with IE 5.0 and later and Opera Customer evaluates if goal is completed 10Sufficient and readable documentationCustomer evaluates if goal is completed

T Project Review 12 Evaluation of tools 1/2 XMLSpy: Worked all right, though not with Terminal Server. DTD-->XSD conversion didn’t work without tweaking. Visio: Bad choice! Rational Rose would have been better, at least for UML. DB: database creation/synchronization/reverse engineering didn’t work well. UML: reverse engineering didn’t work properly, code creation was buggy. MS SQL Server 2000: Very good database. Enterprise manager was especially helpful.

T Project Review 13 Evaluation of tools 2/2 Adobe Acrobat: Couldn’t always create pdfs if there were graphics in the document.NET: Lots of features In some cases.NET 1.1 would have helped Source Safe: Some problems (maybe because of Terminal Server)

T Project Review 14 Educational value Software Engineering Good project management vital Distributed project needs especially good communications system Skills Microsoft.NET and C#

T Project Review 15 Steering group Steering group’s comments and questions

T Project Review 16 Thank you very much