search

openETCS / toolchain

WP7: Top Level Project for the toolchain
27 stars 30 forks source link

Evaluate Reqcycle #470

Closed cecilebraun closed 9 years ago

morido commented 9 years ago

Is this an issue about the white-labeled Reqtify by Dassault Systèmes, which SCADE uses for requirements management? If so the title contains a spelling error.

However, since @MariellePetitDoche is assigned I am tempted to assume this is actually not about Reqtify at all, but rather about Reqcycle, a very much different OSS-tool from the Polarsys project discussed in #452 Can anyone clarify?

MariellePetitDoche commented 9 years ago

It is an error in the title. I change it.

morido commented 9 years ago

ReqCycle has made some progress handling our files. Here is a summary of the current state by Raphaël Faudou (one of ReqCycle's developers).

Raphaël's mail from two days ago:

[...] I have just tested import of chapter4 and chapter 5 from your actual specifications. I think that import is now correct because ReqCycle handles XHTML parts and translates them appropriately (i think so). [...]

Concerning their visualization in the requirement view, that is a different story. when there is only one line, it is displayed (previous mail) but on larger text, the current requirement view does not show anything and property view limits display to a poor « … ».

[...]

So, practically it means that:

  • XHTML is now probably imported appropriately from ReqIF files
  • but XHTML is not yet displayed in Requirement view.

Part of the solution is done but not entirely. I’m going to investigate what can be done at requirement view. Keep you informed. Best raphaël

Here is a sample screenshot of chapter 5 which Raphaël provided to me:

screenshot_chap5

morido commented 9 years ago

Raphaël also send me two test files of chapters 4 & 5 which need checking (no data missing, hierarchy ok, etc.). Please get in touch with me so I can forward those files appropriately.

jastram commented 9 years ago

@raphaelfaudou - I'll assign you, as this falls into your area of responsibility now.

jastram commented 9 years ago

Closing, as this is resolved as part of the Traceability Architecture Document.