Inquiry-Based Requirements Analysis
IEEE Software
Four dark corners of requirements engineering
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use
Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use
gIBIS: a hypertext tool for team design deliberation
HYPERTEXT '87 Proceedings of the ACM conference on Hypertext
Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Mining software repositories
Analyzing Regulatory Rules for Privacy and Security Requirements
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Why Eliciting and Managing Legal Requirements Is Hard
RELAW '08 Proceedings of the 2008 Requirements Engineering and Law
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Requirements engineers need to understand regulatory texts in order to build legally compliant software systems. Resources that expose issues concerning the how, why, and what in laws may help engineers build legally compliant systems. In this paper, we analyze the email discussion archives that focus on updating the provision 1194.21(g) in Section 508 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act. The U.S. Access Board instituted a Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory Committee (TEITAC) comprised of nearly 40 members with diverse backgrounds and experience in the accessibility domain. The members used email as the primary means of communication. We analyze their discussions for provision 1194.21(g) of Section 508 using grounded theory concepts. Our analysis approach entailed three steps preparation for analysis, identification of statement linkages, and classification of statement linkages. We identified seven linkage categories (agreement, provisional agreement, disagreement, interrogation, response, exemplification, description) that connect the discussion statements. These categories may assist requirements engineers in reaching a better understanding of this legal domain.