International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

An Agile Methodology For Implementing Knowledge Management

Systems : A Case Study In Component-Based Software Engineering

Mostefai Mohammed Amine 1, Mohamed Ahmed-Nacer 2

1
Ecole Supérieure d’Informatique Oued Smar, Algiers, Algeria
2
Université Sciences et Technologie, Houari Boumediene Bab Ezzouar,
Algiers, Algeria
1
m_mostefai@esi.dz, 2 anacer@mail.cerist.dz

Abstract

Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE) is a knowledge-intensive discipline

where all activities require the use and the transfer of knowledge between collaborators. A
better usage, transfer and application of this knowledge are required factors to face the
challenges of CBSE. In this perspective, Knowledge Management (KM) aims at setting up
knowledge-focused processes in the organization. Knowledge Management Systems (KMS)
are the technological infrastructure supporting these processes. In this paper, we present a
new methodology of KMS implementation in a CBSE-oriented organization. We also present
a case study of applying this methodology in an existing CBSE organization.

Keywords: Component-Based Software Engineering, Knowledge Management,

Knowledge Management System

1. Introduction
Component-based software engineering (CBSE) is a discipline that consists in the
development of systems as assemblies of parts (software components), the development of
parts as reusable entities and the maintenance and upgrading of systems by customizing and
replacing such parts [1].
A software component is a unit of composition with contractually specified interfaces and
explicit context dependencies only. A software component can be deployed independently
and is subject to composition by third-parties [2].
CBSE involves many people working in different phases and activities. The knowledge
used and produced in these activities is various, growing and hardly traceable: organizations
have problems keeping track of what this knowledge is, where it is, and who owns it [3].
Knowledge Management (KM) provides mechanisms to create, share, transfer and apply
knowledge. KM relies on a technological infrastructure called Knowledge Management
Systems (KMS) [4].
This paper concerns the implementation of KMS in an organization using CBSE. To
implement the KMS, we will use a new methodology that combines aspects from agile
methodologies and existing KMS-oriented methodologies.
To test our methodology, we will apply it to the implementation of a KMS in an existing
organization that makes an intensive usage of CBSE.
We also present in this paper the results of the application of that methodology in the
organization. These results are categorized in two aspects: the static aspects which is an

159
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

ontology that represent the domain of CBSE and the dynamic aspect which is the deployed
KMS.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 concerns the definitions of “Knowledge”,
“Knowledge Management” and “Knowledge Management Systems”. This section is also
about some aspects that should be taken into consideration when implementing KMS such as
the expected features of KMS and the existing methodologies. Section 3 addresses the
motivations of implementing KMS in CBSE and lists some similar experiences. Section 4
details our methodology and the factors that let us propose it instead of using an existing one.
Section 5 presents a case study of an application of our methodology and the related results.
Finally, section 6 concludes.

2. Knowledge, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management

Systems
2.1 Knowledge

Knowledge is defined as a justified belief that increases an entity’s capacity for effective
action [5]. There are two types of knowledge: (1) the explicit knowledge which is a formal or
semi-formal knowledge in the form of documents, manuals, formulas, etc., and (2) tacit
knowledge which is a deeply individual knowledge. While the first type of knowledge is easy
to share and transmit, the second type is difficult to formalize and to transmit.
Knowledge is subject to four possible transformations: (1) the externalization concerns
the formalization mechanisms that allow transforming individual knowledge into sharable
knowledge, (2) the internalization process consists of learning by transforming a formal
knowledge to a personal knowledge, (3) the combination process is about composing multiple
formal knowledge sources to create a new formal knowledge or experience and (4) the
socialization process consists in combining informal knowledge without passing by any
formalization.
The challenge of KM is to maximize externalization to increase the organization’s
capacity of using corporate knowledge.

2.2 Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems

Knowledge management is a method that simplifies the process of sharing, distributing,

creating, capturing and understanding of a company’s knowledge [6].
The adoption of KM in professional organizations is due to many factors such as the
competitiveness of the market, the constant need of innovation, the reduction of teams, the
reduction of learning time, the importance of the tacit knowledge of key collaborators and the
damages caused by departures [7].
Knowledge Management Systems are a class of information systems designed for sharing
and integrating knowledge [8]. KMS are the technological infrastructure that makes the KM
concrete in the organization.

2.3 KMS Implementation Considerations

2.3.1 KMS Main Features

The main features of a KMS are categorized in six main categories [9]: (1) the content
repository feature allows the storage and the retrieval of knowledge, (2) the collaboration

160
 International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

feature is about the communication tools permitting to link users, (3) the knowledge
dissemination feature concerns the mechanisms of a quick and an efficient access to
knowledge, (4) the content integration feature concerns importing knowledge from external
sources, (5) the domain ontology feature targets the representation of the domain knowledge
and (6) the knowledge security feature is how the KMS protects knowledge and secures the
access to it.

2.3.2 KMS Implementation Methodologies

KMS constitute a special kind of information systems that are implemented using special
dedicated methodologies.
There are many attempts to propose a KMS implementation methodology in literature.
[10] lists many methodologies coming from both academic and industrial world and proposes
its own methodology composed of twelve (12) steps. [11] and [12] are other examples of
KMS implementation methodologies.
Even if the methodologies are different, heterogeneous and composed of various steps,
they all include three major phases: analysis, implementation and exploitation. Each phase
will be mapped into one or more steps in each methodology and will be executed in a
sequential, iterative or parallel way according to the methodology.
The analysis phase concerns the extraction of the concepts and their relationships
according to the target domain. This will result in an ontology and the business requirements
of the KMS. The implementation phase consists in transforming the results of the previous
phase into a working IT system. The exploitation phase permits to move the KMS from a
development / test status to an exploitation status where users can use the KMS to share and
access knowledge.

3. Motivations of Implementing KM in CBSE and Related Work

The main purpose of CBSE is to reduce time-to-market delays by using (or reusing)
components. However, CBSE can also engender some risks [1, 13]: an increased time and
effort required for the development of components, the consequences of bad component
selection, the dependence to the component supplier and the costs of the maintenance of
components.
These risks can be avoided or at least reduced if the knowledge existing in the brain of
collaborators, in the corporate memory or outside the organization is effectively captured and
used. The motivations of using Knowledge Management (KM) in CBSE are justified by the
(1) desire of capturing and using process and product knowledge, (2) the identification of
knowledge holders, (3) the integration of external or internal knowledge sources and (4) the
need of avoiding making the same errors in development projects using or producing
components.
The implementation of KM does not intend to be a replacement of the current software
processes and tools in the organization. It is a support tool that targets making knowledge
accessible, shared, easily transmissible and effectively applicable.
The community of software engineering has shown a growing interest in implementing
KM in the last decade [14]. One of the most famous achievements in implementing KM in
software engineering (SE) is the experience factory brought by the Basili et al. in [15].
However, the experience factory is based on a proprietary methodology called QIM (Quality
Improvement Paradigm) and addresses software engineering in general and not especially
CBSE.
161
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

In [16], authors detail some case studies of implementing KM in some software

companies. The study focused more on both the managerial aspects and the obtained results
than the technological infrastructure. Again, there is no particular focus on CBSE in this
study.

4. Methodology for KMS Implementation

4.1 Motivations for a New Methodology

Many factors urged us to propose our own methodology instead of using an existing one.
The first factor is that a project conducted using existing methodologies is a long and
fastidious process that requires an important investment in time, budget and resources. The
second factor is that the existing methodologies do not focus on client collaboration, which
can lead to the project failure [17]. For our project, the target organization which is in IT
domain aimed for a tight implication in all the phases of the project.
The last factor is that our team masters and applies agile methodologies. So does the
target organization. Consequently, the team desired to fructify this experience instead of
learning a new one.
These factors pushed us to propose our own methodology based on agile methodologies
[18] which have the following characteristics: (1) short iterations, (2) intensive customer
collaboration, (3) continuous assessment and integration and (4) early identification of risks
and misconceptions. In addition to “pure” agile aspects, our methodology handles the KM-
oriented phases listed in the previous section which are the analysis, implementation and
exploitation.
To validate our methodology, we put it directly to practice by conducting our first project
targeting a CBSE organization.

4.2 KMS Implementation Methodology Details

Our methodology is an iterative process composed of a starting phase called initialization

and five other iterative phases: Domain Mapping, Profile and Policies Identification,
Implementation and Personalization and finally, the Validation phase. The figure 1 illustrates
this methodology.

Fig 1 - The KMS Implementation Methodology

162
 International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

4.2.1 The initialization phase

This is longest and the most important phase of the methodology. This phase is about the
first contact between the development team, the customer and the business domain.
The main objective of this phase is to have the deepest understanding possible of the
organization, the corporate knowledge, the knowledge flows and the business concepts. It is
also about understanding the culture of the organization and its environment.
There are two ways of implementing KMS: build it from scratch or by extending an
existing system (this system is called base system). The second approach is generally
privileged for two reasons: most of companies already have a base system installed and the
second reason is that this base system includes natively some KMS features such as storage or
collaboration. The base system can be a collaborative portal such as Sharepoint [19], Lotus
Notes [20], an ECM (Enterprise Content Management System) such as Alfresco [21] or
Documentum [22] or a DMS (Document Management System) such as Knowledge Tree [23].
The cited examples are not an exhaustive list but represent the most popular products in the
domain.
The initialization phase is also about the creation of an initial ontology [24] of the domain
and the selection of the main sources that will provide the concepts for that ontology. The
ontology sources include the enterprise business domain, the enterprise culture, related books
and manuals and also existing related ontologies.
The choices concern also the tools that will be used to create and maintain the ontology
(for example Protégé [25]) and the language used to represent it (for example UML, XML or
OWL [26]).
Because of the sensitive nature of that phase, it will likely be the longest phase and will
last from three to six months according to the size of the organization and the complexity of
the domain.

4.2.2 The domain mapping phase

The ontology created in the initialization phase is only a start for an iterative process
where this ontology evolves over time. Through a continuous contact with the customers and
the end-users, the domain mapping phase handles the capture of new concepts and
relationships between concepts in the business domain.
In this phase, the ontology is mapped into the system. This mapping is generally
performed using content types, fields and instances of content types.

4.2.3 Profiles and Policies Identification Phase

As any classical information system, KMS are used by multiple users and groups of
users. Every user, according to his membership, has a set of authorized and unauthorized
actions that he can perform.
The Profile and policies phase defines the authentification mechanisms and the
authorization scopes of the KMS users.

4.2.4 The Implementation and Personalization Phase

In this phase, the modules allowing the usage, the capture and the processing of the new
concepts are built.

163
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

The modules are developed using the adequate programming tools and languages and are
deployed into test environments to assess their quality.
During this phase also, content gateways are put in place. Content gateways are special
software services that are responsible of integrating external content from different sources of
data. For each data source, a gateway is created that is responsible of converting provided
data into elements usable by the KMS.
While the previous phase (Profiles and Policies) is about security and authorization,
personalization concerns how knowledge is presented to users. For example, non-technical
users will be bothered by displaying too much technical information when they try to access
the KMS.
Personalization consists in developing various representation of the same knowledge
according to the end-user profile.

4.2.5 The Validation Phase

In this phase, the KMS is not yet exploitable but is still usable and accessible in test
servers.
In this step, KMS developers and testers ensures that the KMS is performing the expected
operations and is conform to the enterprise requirements. In this phase also, access is given to
a group of end users (or beta testers) that will give their feedback and acceptance about the
usability of the KMS.
This phase should emphasize on the non-regression of the KMS caused by the evolution
of the ontology.

5. Implementing the KMS in a Context of CBSE

5.1 The Context

Our project is a part of a larger project initiated in 2005 in our software engineering
department. The project is about implementing a KMS in an enterprise that makes an
intensive usage of CBSE.
The target organization is a partner of a world leader in smart cards technology and
performs all her developments using .NET technologies (C#, Visual Studio, etc.). The
enterprise belongs to an industrial group that focuses essentially on security. The industrial
group is composed of many companies with dozens of employees each. The technical
department is composed of about 30 collaborators.

5.2 The Implementation

The initialization phase was essentially about gathering the maximum information about
the organization, its culture, CBSE and its challenges.
We had many sources to build the initial ontology: the SWEBOK reference [27], some
ontology projects based on SWEBOK such as [28] and of course, the client experience,
culture and point of view.
The choices were not difficult to take because the enterprise already had Microsoft
Sharepoint 2007 in place. Our project was structured to fit the extension of Sharepoint to
perform the KMS features. Our choices were consequently led to Visual Studio 2008 [29] and
Microsoft Sharepoint Designer [30] as development tools and UML (Unified Modeling
Language) for representing the business ontology.

164
 International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

After the initialization phase, we drove the process in five iterations of six weeks each.
Because of the short delay, we collected quick feedback from users and around the second
iteration, the development team and the end-users were speaking the same language because
we eliminated many misconceptions.
The domain ontology that we created evolved to about 250 concepts. All the concepts
inherit directly or indirectly from three parent concepts: Agent, Activity and Artefact.
For example, the concept Project derives from ComposedActivity that derives itself from
the Activity concept. The concept Component derives indirectly from the “Artefact” concept
whereas the concept “ComponentSelection” derives indirectly from the “Activity” concept.
The end users dived very quickly into the KMS because of the progressive deliveries
engendered by the short iterations. The KMS serves as a central point that captures developer
experiences and facilitates usage through component integration and development.
There was no rejection from the users because of their tight participation in all the stages
of the project.
Table 1 summarizes the execution and the overall scenario of the project. Each line
provides a description of the results obtained in the related phase.

Table 1 – KMS Implementation Phases

Duration
Iteration

Phase Results

0 Initialization Sharepoint as a base system, VS 2008 and Sharepoint Designer

3 Months

as tools, UML to describe ontology and business concepts,

First contact with the organization, about 50 concepts for the
initial ontology. SWEBOK, CBSE resources (books, white
papers) and the enterprise culture as the ontology sources.

Domain Mapping First concepts about CBSE, hierarchical parents : artifact, agent
and activity, about 80 concepts
6 Weeks

Profiles and Policies Identification of technical and non-technical profiles

1
Implementation Implementation of the first forms for acquiring knowledge
about projects, components and collaborators
Validation Testing the modules implemented, end-users feedback
Domain Mapping Activities, projects and development methodologies
6 Weeks

Profiles and Policies Additional profiles : designers, architects, developers, testers

2 Implementation Forms for additional concepts, screens and forms
concerning activities, related validation rules
Validation Scenarios according to the ontology evolution
Domain Mapping Modeling software tools, component-oriented concepts such as
Selection and Identification, about 140 concepts
6 Weeks

Profiles and Policies Component-oriented profiles such as component selectors,

3 security rules for collaborators
Implementation Screens and forms for new concepts
Validation Simulation projects and non-regression tests (tests of the
previous iterations
Domain Mapping About 220 concepts in the ontology, new concepts about
W

ks
ee

4
6

external elements: suppliers, customers, organizations

165
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

Profiles and Policies Map security with Active Directory

Implementation Collaboration forums and chats, portals, wikis
Validation Non-regression tests, Acceptance tests
Domain Mapping About 250 concepts
6 Weeks Profiles and Policies Finalizing integration with active directory, non-technical
profiles personalization and filters
5
Implementation Integration with external sources (code repository, file servers),
global deployment
Validation Global acceptance tests

5.2.1 Results

5.2.1.1 The Ontology

The ontology was progressively constructed basing on the collaboration of the target
organization and SWEBOK.
We used UML as a formalism to represent the ontology. Concepts were directly mapped
into Sharepoint content types. The ontology contains about 250 concepts.
Figure 2 is an example of a subset of the UML diagrams representing the component
selection activity.

Fig 2. An UML Example of a Subset of the Ontology

This example represents the component selection activity which inherits from the activity
concept. A project inherits from ComposedActivity, a special activity composed of other
activities including eventually the selection.
The component selector, a descendant from the concept “Agent” is the collaborator who
performs the selection.

166
 International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

5.2.1.2 The KMS

The architecture of our KMS is illustrated in figure 3:

Fig 3. The KMS Architecture

Our KMS is a multi-layered system built on top of Sharepoint. The table 2 summarizes
the KMS layers and how they implement the features cited in section III:

Table 2 – KMS Architectural Layers and Features

Layer Features Implementati Description
on

Meta-Data Domain Ontology Sharepoint This layer is the ontology representation using
Layer content types and Sharepoint content types. It includes all the domain
custom fields concepts and relationships

Knowledge Content Repository SQL Server and This layer stores all the knowledge instances
Base Layer and Knowledge Sharepoint related to CBSE domain such as components,
Dissemination persistence projects, activities, collaborators, etc
services
Content Content Integration Code repositories This layer is responsible of the automatic
Integration (version collection of external knowledge resulting from
Service management miscellaneous sources such as files, source code
system), file repositories, document repositories, internet, etc.
system
Security Knowledge Security Active Directory Authenticates collaborators and processes and
Service define their access level and action perimeter

Personaliza Knowledge CSS, web forms, Adapts (form and content) knowledge elements to
tion Service Dissemination ASP.NET the profile of the current user. For examples, filters
"too technical" information to the "manager"
profile
Collaborati Collaboration Sharepoint Provides a set of tools allowing collaborators to be
on Service collaboration synchronously or asynchronously linked (for
features example forums, chats, mailings…etc.). In addition
to that, this service provides a gateway to the
content integration service for capturing
knowledge created or transferred in
communications (chat captures, resolved forum
queries, etc.).

167
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

Access Knowledge Sharepoint forms The access point allows entering knowledge
Point Dissemination and intranet queries, creating or updating knowledge instances
features, search and evaluating existing knowledge instances. The
engines access point is a simple internet browser that
provides access to Sharepoint portal.

5.2.1.3 Results Interpretation

The major outputs of the methodology consist in two aspects: the static aspect that
concerns the concepts related to CBSE and their relations and the dynamic aspect which is the
KMS itself.
Although the conduction of the methodology was performed in a CBSE organization,
there have been no specific concepts to that organization. The SWEBOK [27] and other
CBSE-related resources provided most of the concepts of the ontology. The positive impact
of the resulting ontology is that it is highly reusable in other KMS projects targeting
organizations of the same domain.
Concerning the KMS itself, the extension strategy that we adopted lead us to produce an
architecture that is based on the architecture of the base system. Consequently, some aspects
such as security, presentation and storage depend tightly on how are they implemented in this
base system (Sharepoint 2007).
In addition of permitting to the target organization to handle the KM processes such as
creation, storage, transfer and retrieval, this experience can be an accelerator for other
projects having one of the following similarities: implementing KMS in CBSE by using
another base system (ontology reuse) or implementing KMS in another domain using the
same base system (the project artefacts reuse).

6. Conclusion
CBSE is a knowledge-intensive activity where collaborators produce and consume
knowledge during all the development phases. An effective usage, transfer and capture of this
knowledge are vital to the survival and the competitiveness of organizations using CBSE. To
ensure that, KM is the solution and the KMS are the technological infrastructure needed for
the success of that solution.
In this paper, we proposed a new methodology for the implementation of KMS. This
methodology is based on concepts brought both from agile methodologies and existing KMS
implementation methodologies. The main objectives of our methodology are: an early
elimination of risks and misconceptions by ensuring short iterations, continuous integration
and intensive customer collaboration.
To be executed, our methodology requires less resources and budget than existing
methodologies. To validate our methodology, we put in practice by using it in the
implementation of a KMS in a CBSE organization.
The project was conducted in 42 weeks and five iterations of six weeks each. Microsoft
Sharepoint was used as a base system to the implementation of the KMS. The resulting
ontology contained about 250 concepts coming from SWEBOK and the customer experience.
In the first weeks of the KMS exploitation, the results were satisfying and the customer
did not encounter difficulties to adopt the KMS.
Although the results are positive, some work remains to do. At the implementation level,
it would be interesting to reproduce the experience in other companies using different base
systems (such as Alfresco or Documentum). At a managerial level, our methodology
addresses essentially explicit knowledge that is manipulated by the KMS. We have to
168
 International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

improve the methodology to propose mechanisms to handle tacit knowledge and motivate
users to produce, to share and to assess knowledge.
Finally, at a transversal level, we plan to apply the methodology to a broader domain
(general software engineering) and eventually, to a categorically different domain that
requires KM implementation.

References
[1] I. Crnkovic, "Component-based software engineering: New challenges in software development," CIT.
Journal of computing and information technology, pp. 151-161, 2003.
[2] C. Szyperski, Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming, Second Edition ed.: Addison-
Wesley, 2002.
[3] I. Rus and M. Lindvall, "Knowledge management in software engineering," IEEE Software, vol. 19, pp. 26-
38, 2002.
[4] M. Alavi and D. E. Leidner, "Review : Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems :
Conceptual Foundation and Research Issues," MIS Quarterly, vol. 25, pp. 107-136, 2001.
[5] I. Nonaka and N. Konno, "The concept of "Ba": building a foundation for knowledge creation," California
Management Review, vol. 40, pp. 40-54, 1998.
[6] T. Davenport and L. Prusak, Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know: {Project
Management Institute}, 1997.
[7] R. O. Barclay and P. C. Murray. (1997, What is knowledge management?
[8] M. Alavi, et al., "Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges, and benefits," Communications of the
AIS, vol. 1, 1999.
[9] W. Staniszkis, "Feature Requirements of a Knowledge Management System," Rodan Systems S.A.2003.
[10] F. A. Calabrese and C. Y. Orlando, "Deriving a 12-step process to create and implement a comprehensive
knowledge management system," VINE, vol. 36, pp. 238 - 254, 2006.
[11] H. Smuts, et al., "A framework and methodology for knowledge management system implementation,"
presented at the Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of
Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, Vanderbijlpark, Emfuleni, South Africa, 2009.
[12] R. Chalmeta and R. Grangel, "Methodology for the implementation of knowledge management systems," J.
Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., vol. 59, pp. 742-755, 2008.
[13] J. Voas, "COTS software: the economical choice?," Software, IEEE, vol. 15, pp. 16-19, 1998.
[14] F. Bjornson and T. Dingsoyr, "Knowledge management in software engineering: A systematic review of
studied concepts, findings and research methods used," Information and Software Technology, vol. 50, pp.
1055-1068, 2008.
[15] V. R. Basili, et al., "THE EXPERIENCE FACTORY," Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, vol. 2, 1994.
[16] T. Dingsøyr and R. Conradi, "A survey of case studies of the use of knowledge management in software
engineering," International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 12, pp. 391–
414, 2002.
[17] C. M. Cullough. (2005). What Is Knowledge Management - Knowing What We Know? Available:
http://www.isnare.com/?aid=6711&ca=Business+Management
[18] S. Augustine, Managing Agile Projects: Prentice Hall; illustrated edition, 2005.
[19] D. Sterling, Microsoft® Office SharePoint® Server 2007: The Complete Reference, Mc Graw Hill ed., 2008.
[20] C. Bobrowski and G. Kreymann, "Knowledge Management in Internal Medicine Using Lotus Notus – A
Knowledge Management Perspective," in Professional Knowledge Management. vol. 3782, K.-D. Althoff, et
al., Eds., ed: Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2005, pp. 339-348.
[21] Alfresco. (2010). Alfresco Products and Services. Available: http://www.alfresco.com/products/
[22] EMC. (2010). EMC Documentum. Available: http://www.emc.com/domains/documentum/index.htm
[23] KnowledgeTree. (2010). KnowledgeTree Features. Available: http://www.knowledgetree.com/features
[24] T. R. Gruber, "Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing," International
Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 43, pp. 907-928, 1995.

169
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications
Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011

[25] W. E. Grosso, et al., "Knowledge modeling at the millennium (The design and evolution of Protégé-2000),"
Proceedings of the Twelfth Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling, and Management, Banff,
Canada, 1999.
[26] M. Lenzerini, et al., "Ontologies Representation & Reasoning," Universit di Roma La Sapienza2004.
[27] A. Abran, et al., Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge - SWEBOK: IEEE Press, 2004.
[28] O. Mendes and A. Abran, "SOFTWARE ENGINEERING ONTOLOGY: A DEVELOPMENT
METHODOLOGY," Metrics News, vol. 9, pp. 68-76, 2004.
[29] Microsoft. (2008, 2010). Visual Studio. Available: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa718325
[30] Microsoft. (2007). Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007 Top 10 Benefits. Available:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/microsoft-office-sharepoint-designer-2007-top-10-benefits-
HA010165022.aspx?CTT=1

170