ABSTRACT
At that point, the work must transition to software analysts who can apply modern structured analysis, early object-oriented analysis (OOA), or unied modeling language (UML) to continue the analysis while not having any way to clearly link the results of their work to the lower fringe of the system analysis work. It is intended that this gap be lled using a combined model base composed of UML and TSA with the understanding that the development organization should be working to replace TSA with system modeling language (SysML) as the latter matures to fully cover the TSA territory and as the workforce matures in the transition. Figure 12.1 suggests that there is a collection of modeling artifacts that are formed by the union of UML and TSA, as well as between UML and SysML, that will provide us with a complete set of modeling artifacts to use in analyzing any problem space no matter how it is intended to be implemented. Figure 12.1 also suggests that the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) can be introduced into this same pool of modeling artifacts. In many system development efforts, DoDAF can be used to initiate the system analysis with a subsequent resort to TSA as elements of the system are identi-ed that must be developed as hardware entities. Also, we will see that DoDAF can rely upon UML, SysML, and TSA for the modeling artifacts
it employs. The message is that today the system engineer needs to be more than just familiar with a pool of modeling artifacts as suggested in Figure 12.1. System engineers have to be ready to apply the complete model set that provides them with comprehensive coverage of the problem space.
