Assignment - T-Low food delivery service¶

Presentations and recordings for the assignment

Presentation during introduction session on Wed 13th March. Video recording in Panopto: https://tuni.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=5060e5c6-2e10-4ab6-b234-b13400a2f98a

Group project facilitation events:

Wednesday 20.3. (use cases) - https://tuni.zoom.us/j/68872901652?pwd=ckNielhwU25wejNWRzJLWTIvUzM5dz09 - Meeting ID: 688 7290 1652 Passcode: 447478 - Slides facilitation 1 - Video recording https://tuni.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=d3e66889-dbc9-4d0e-98d4-b13b0079fbf9
Wednesday 17.4. (design and diagrams: components, deployments). - Zoom link: https://tuni.zoom.us/j/65289169044?pwd=UWdMS3RiWU54SjlNdU01ZXNqSG82UT09 - Meeting ID: 652 8916 9044 Passcode: 183223 - Slides facilitation 2 - Video recording https://tuni.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=791d1626-3d1d-44ec-8034-b155009fa140

Group formation in Teams:

https://teams.microsoft.com/l/team/19%3A5nNcNw8Sw-tU_EMDPvIlF_7vteSUG7IhTPZHDdMWo9c1%40thread.tacv2/conversations?groupId=c59686e1-d15d-43d1-bfb1-d91341347c04&tenantId=fa6944af-cc7c-4cd8-9154-c01132798910

Submissions¶

You are expected to submit twice for this project:

Intermediary submission
- document with use cases/scenarios and requirements (PDF)
- (the scenarios are the +1 part of the 4+1 model)
Final submission with everything done
- the all-inclusive final design document (PDF) with all diagrams embedded
- 4 UML charts drawn as separate submissions (case tool files, for research purposes)

Specification¶

Please read the specification carefully!

https://plus.tuni.fi/graderA/static/compse210-spring2024/_static/Lssd2024GroupAssignment.pdf

General requirements¶

Tool for writing. You can write your document using any means your group wants.

Tool for drawing. The charts should be drawn with the open source case tool Eclipse Papyrus

Version history. We will follow the participant's contribution via the version history of the document, which must specify each group member’s work section in the document.

Peer review¶

At the end of the assignment, we carry out peer-reviews within the groups to evaluate the contribution. The evaluation will affect the grade. If all the measures indicate that no contribution was made, this student will not be able to pass the assignment.

Questions?¶

Questions about this assignment should be directed to:

You're also welcome to ask questions in the Teams channel

Grading¶

The grading criteria are given in the table below.

Criteria¶
Item	Points
Justifications	250
4+1 views are well documented and complete, covering the requirements; 80 pts for each view	400
General quality	100
Total	750

Some examples of possible minus items:

Architecture design conflicts with the requirements
Some requirements not covered
Bad general quality beoynd the above mentioned 100 pts
Ambiguous, incorrect, syntactically wrong, or difficult-to-read diagrams
Bad document structure
Word limit exceeded
Author names or other required metadata missing

Separate your metatext (justifications) by writing them in italic text.

Please emphasize clear expression and quality over length – as long as the documentation explains what is necessary. That is, length is less important than the actual content. Too lengthy and ill-structured documentation may even decrease your points. The absolute maximum length is 4000 words.