IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Colaborated Architechture Framework for Composition UML 2.0 in

Zachman Framework
To cite this article: Hermawan and Fika Hastarista 2016 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 105 012037

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 5.183.130.116 on 30/03/2021 at 05:33

ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

COLABORATED ARCHITECHTURE FRAMEWORK FOR

COMPOSITION UML 2.0 IN ZACHMAN FRAMEWORK

Hermawan1, Fika Hastarista2

1,2
Jurusan Teknik Informatika, Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Trunojoyo Madura,
Indonesia (69162)

E-mail : [email protected] 1, [email protected] 2

Abstract. Zachman Framework (ZF) is the framework of enterprise architechture that most
widely adopted in the Enterprise Information System (EIS) development. In this study, has
been developed Colaborated Architechture Framework (CAF) to collaborate ZF with Unified
Modeling Language (UML) 2.0 modeling. The CAF provides the composition of ZF matrix
that each cell is consist of the Model Driven architechture (MDA) from the various UML
models and many Software Requirement Specification (SRS) documents. Implementation of
this modeling is used to develops Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP). Because ERP have a
coverage of applications in large numbers and complexly relations, it is necessary to use Agile
Model Driven Design (AMDD) approach as an advanced method to transforms MDA into
components of application modules with efficiently and accurately. Finally, through the using
of the CAF, give good achievement in fullfilment the needs from all stakeholders that are
involved in the overall process stage of Rational Unified Process (RUP), and also obtaining a
high satisfaction to fullfiled the functionality features of the ERP software in PT. Iglas
(Persero) Gresik.

Keywords: Agile Model Driven Design (AMDD), Colaborated Architechture Framework

(CAF), Model Driven Architechture (MDA), Unified Modelling Language (UML), Zachman
Framework (ZF).

1. Introduction
Previously, various tools and techniques are provided for information system (IS) development, that
are specific to an aspect or many aspects relation, such as the using of the basic flowchart shapes, ERD
modeling, Data Flow Diagram, or Object Oriented modelling. However, in accordance with the
demands of the information technology (IT) development requirements today, where so many
stakeholders involved with many different perspectives and objectives that would influence system, so
IT developers require more integrated architechture blue print to fullfiled overall Rational Unified
Process (RUP) stages in IT projects.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Enterprise Architecture Framework (EAF) is a tool that can be used for developing a broad range of
different architectures, where set of tools for EAF is supported with list of recommended on
standardization within models and documents to build fully block of IT conceptual blueprint. Benefit
of the using an EAF will speed up and simplify architecture development, ensure more complete
coverage of the designed solution [1].

The ZF is one of the most widely adopted EAF in the Enterprise Information System (EIS)
development [2]. The ZF provides a concept to produce a systematic taxonomy to declares a
relationship without replacing anything in the real world and changing the tools, techniques and
methodologies, but otherwise give collaboration of various viewpoints according to many perspectives
and abstraction for architechture modelling [3].

ZF same as others EAF such TOGAF, IAF, FEAF, DoDAF within the primary principal consists of
conceptual modeling language, that provides modelling platform and analysis list of the EA included
strategy, process and dimensions of the application, as well as support various aspects of the structure
and behavior of software artifacts [4]. In generally each EAF has different focus in providing
architectural solutions. By reviewing two of the most popular EAF framework that are ZF and
TOGAF, ZF more focused on the constructing architecture views in multi perspective of the EA, while
TOGAF as view of process to describe the RUP stages to constructing the EA [5].

However in RUP stages, many EA practitioners prefer to using hybrid architecture approach to
combine various EAF by taking some of the advantages of each frameworks [5]. Such as Integrated
Architecture Framework (IAF) which provides a best practices approach more in order to integrated
the various frameworks that have been existing. Where the advantages of the IAF lies in values and
flexibilities within combination with other EA such Togaf ADM and ZF[6].

IAF has focused more on the processes to “Why, What, and How” as best practices to give transition
solving from business components into application components, but less provided scalable
architectural view then ZF. While ZF did’nt defined specific modelling like as support object oriented
modelling where still be a mature paradigma to analyzing and developing software components today.

For this reason, in this study we propose Colaborated Architecture Framework (CAF) that is having
focus as the best practice for composing structured models and documents to defines the software
requirement specification (SRS) blue print, that based on object-oriented modeling approach use the
UML 2.0, which has more scalable architecture view in “What, How, Where, Who, When, Why”
adopting ZF to fullfil overall RUP stages in SDLC.

2. Methodology
2.1 Collaborations of Zachman Framework and UML 2.0
The CAF composing UML within the ZF 6x6 cell of matrix dimensions, in accordance with the six
perspective of Scope (planner's view), Enterprise model (business owner's view), Model of
fundamental concepts (designer's view), Technology model (builder's view), Detailed representations
(sub-contractor's view), Functioning system. Which provide solutions for the six dimensional
abstraction of english interrogatives that are consist of: What (Data), How (Function), Where
(Network), Who (People), When (Time), Why (Motivation). The using of UML to support ZF
architecture is the systematic composition to be developed [7] which makes itself a basis for
evaluating, establishing, and customizing other enterprise architectural frameworks, methods, and
tools [8].
Within the ERP that we developed for PT. Iglas (Persero) Gresik-Indonesia consists of 7 modules:
Financial-Accounting (FA), Customer Relationship Management (CRM) - Distribution, Material-
Production, Procurement, Human Resource Management, Inventory, and asset management [9].

2
 ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Which for sample implementation case we focus to describing CAF for one domain module that is the
FA, as a core of ERP modules like as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Composition CAF of the UML models and SRS documents in the Zachman Framework [3] 1
Abstraksi/ DATA FUNCTION NETWORK PEOPLE TIME MOTIVATION
Perspektive What How Where Who When Why
/Abstractio (Things) (Process) (Location) (People) (Time) (Motivation)
n
(P1A1) (P1A2) (P1A3) (P1A4) (P1A5) (P1A6)
Planner/
Structure Table of value Map location Structure Workbase list Defines
Contextual
diagram of The chain from from the FA diagram of of business Strategies and
(Scope)
organization business department in managers who process Goals of vision
units and they processes PT. Iglas are responsible activities and mission in
responsibilities within the FA (Persero) to plan, execute, the Iglas FA
in the FA department Gresik and control department
department business
processes within
the FA
Owner/
(P2A1) (P2A2) (P2A3) (P2A4) (P2A5) (P2A6)
Conceptual
Conceptual Business Busines Use Case Operational Defines Goals
(Business
Data Model of Process Model Logistics Diagram of the Schedule of of each FA
Model)
the FA Notation Diagram of FA FA business business business
business (BPMN) of FA units processes activities in the processes
processes FA
Designer/
(P3A1) (P3A2) (P3A3) (P3A4) (P3A5) (P3A6)
Logical
Class Diagram Component Sequence Component RUP schedule Defines logical
(System
for all objects Diagram of Diagram for dependency of Model design of
Model)
in the FA application application matrix from one Driven software
domain component component application Architecture artifacts
component to
others
Builder/
(P4A1) (P4A2) (P4A3) (P4A4) (P4A5) (P4A6)
Physical
Physical Data Deployment Network Interface Design RUP schedule Defines
(Technolog
Model of Diagram of Diagram of for each of Model physical design
y Model)
database installation server farm and functionality Driven of software
package of computer access application Development artifacts
modules
Detailed
(P5A1) (P5A2) (P5A3) (P5A4) (P5A5) (P5A6)
Representat
Structure and Source code List of the Table of RACI SDLC schedule Defines
ion
details of descriptions of networks matrix as a policy of installation installation and
(Sub-
Django Model View configuration to configure and maintenance
Contractor)
Framework Template from for all networks security of access maintenance guaranty
models of each the Django web component rights for each contract
application framework include: router, user who manages
components. switch, wifi, and the software
cabling. applications
(P6A1) (P6A2) (P6A3) (P6A4) (P6A5) (P6A6)
Function
Integration link Package List of the Activity diagram Time schedule Defines System
Enterprise
between FA diagram of global network to manage for monitoring Operational
domain and component configurations activities to and controlling Procedure
other ERP services include internet operate ERP ERP services. (SOP) to
domains relations for the and network services. operate overall
FA domain and security ERP application
other domains services.

____________________________
1
All artifact accordance within the Iglas ERP blueprint

3
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Not many previous studies that laid the blueprint mapping EAF for ERP because generally it does by
many enterprise corporates in big research collaboration. In one individual study, Molnar outlines a
wide-range theoretical background for analyzing the re-engineering and re-organization of ERP
systems, and describes EIS relationship with EAF including ZF [10], but this study was still have
struggling on the theory and strategy paradigm without any more best practice approach to defined
architechture constructing.

That means, the CAF modeling can be a solution in the architecture constructing and then can be used
as a choice in the best practice framework for the implementation of EAF in the development of EIS
including the ERP system.

2.2. Model Driven Architecture

The CAF, it should defines no-overlap determination models for architectures modeling because every
cell has different perspective or objective abstraction, so it has special specifications for different
problem domains [11]. To construct composition UML models in the ZF we use important models that
are most influencing architecture as MDA where is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Specification of the Model Driven Architecture of UML 2.0

Zachman Framework Cell MDA Specification
Business Model Workflow modeling in Business Process Modeling Notation
(Owner/Conceptual), People (BPMN) to collaboration departments and units which have
(Who) (P2A2) responsibility to manage business process activity
Business Model Usecase Diagram show user requirements within business process
(Owner/Conceptual), People activities
(Who) (P2A2)
System Model Class Diagram modeling to define encapsulation of data attributes,
(Designer/Logical), Data methods and they relations to create components of software.
(What) (P3A1)
System Model Component Diagram illustrates the message to exchange data from
(Designer/Logical), Function one component to other components by request method that is
(How) (P3A2) exposed
System Model Sequence Diagram illustrates the interaction of methods in
(Designer/Logical), integration an application service
Location (Where) (P3A3)
Technology Model Deployment Diagram illustrates the deployment of software
(Builder/Physical), Function components into hardware components
(How) (P4A2)
Integration Model (Function Package diagram for encapsulation all components in a single
Enterprise) (How) (P5A2) domain and illustrates collaboration link with other domains.
Integration Model (Function Activity diagram illustrates step by step user activities to manage
Enterprise) (Who) (P5A4) application.

MDA provides a way to define the structured view that allows a model to be constructed, viewed,
developed, and manipulated at analysis and design time before it is coded [8].

2.3. Agile Model Driven Development

Furthermore, through the AMDD for supporting transition the modelling artifacts to the software
artifacts [12], the application development can be done quickly and accurately meets to the feature
requirements. So the coverage needs of EIS that are consists of persistent data, a lot of data, access
data concurrently, a lot of user interface screens, and integrate with other enterprise applications are

4
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

achieved [13]. The main reference models for AMDD that we have executed to develop software
components, they are: BPMN as a Business Service, Class Diagram as a Component Entity Service,
and Sequence Diagram as a Component Utility Service [14].
From one sample scenario in the FA module, we analyze business process in financial transaction
activities, where a register of financial business process is the General Ledger (GL) through the
Journal Entry service. We set the Journal Entry as a core of business service to receive data from all
transactions which is affecting the financial business processes. The Journal Entry in the General
Ledger is the final register transaction of overall data from the whole ERP system, as shown on Figure
1. BPMN for this process is placed in P2A2 cell.

Figure 1, BPMN as business process in GL

From each activity in business services, we have composed into class diagram from each component
entity services, like as shown in Figure 2 where class diagram for the Journal Entry in the GL is
placed in P3A1 cell. From UML Class diagram, the model design is directly driven developing of
component software, because class diagram is able to defines the data attributes and methods in the
business service requirement, as data and operatitonal service in application.
For AMDD programming strategy, we recommend the use of three-tier software architecture
framework, which generally supported domain specific languange in domain driven design
programming concept and component-based plugins [15]. This strategy is having benefits: reduced
communication across the layers, design by contract is sufficient, part of application components can
be tested separately [16]. Among the development frameworks that could be an option, they are: Play
for Java, Rails for Ruby, Grails for Groovy and Django for Python. Where Django framework as the
technology of our choice due to excess AMDD in reliability, speed, and the components plugin are
easily installed and modified.

5
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

T r_ Jo u rn a l _ E n try
M s_ P e ri o d + Jo u rn a l _ E n try_ Id : int
+ Jo u rn a l _ E n try_ No : S tri n g
+ P e ri o d _ Id : int
+ Jo u rn a l : S tri n g
+ P e ri o d _ Co d e : S tri n g M s_ Jo u rn a l
+ Jo u rn a l _ P e ri o d : Da te
+ P e ri o d _ Na m e : S tri n g
+ Re fe re n ce : S tri n g + Jo u rn a l _ Id : int
+ FIsca l _ Y e a r : S tri n g
0 ..1 + Da te : Da te 0 ..* + Jo u rn a l _ Na m e : S tri n g
+ S ta rt_ P e ri o d : Da te
0 ..* + De b i t : double + Co d e : S tri n g
+ E n d _ P e ri o d : Da te 0 ..1
+ Cre d i t : double + T yp e : int
+ S ta tu s : int
+ S ta tu s : int + a d d _ j o u rn a l ()
+ a d d _ p e ri o d ()
+ e n try_ j o u rn a l ()
+ p o sti n g _ g l ()
0 ..1 0 ..*
0 ..*
0 ..1
M s_ Fi sca l _ Y e a r
De ta i l _ Jo u rn a l _ E n try
M s_ A cco u n t
+ Fi sca l _ Y e a r_ Id : int
+ Da te : Da te
+ Co d e : S tri n g + A cco u n t_ Id : int
+ Re fe re n ce : S tri n g + A cco u n t_ Co d e : S tri n g
+ Na m e : S tri n g
+ A cco u n t : S tri n g 0 ..* + A cco u n t_ Na m e : S tri n g
+ S ta rt_ P e ri o d : Da te
+ Jo u rn a l _ E n try : S tri n g 0 ..1
+ E n d _ P e ri o d : Da te + A cco u n t_ T yp e : S tri n g
+ De b i t : double
+ S ta tu s : int - S ta tu s : boolean
+ Cre d i t : double
+ a d d _ fi sca l () + a d d _ a cco u n t ()
+ a d d _ d e ta i l _ j o u rn a l ()

Figure 2, Class Diagram as a component entity service in GL

Class diagrams became references to create functionally component application, within translated they
atributes and methods in a model class, while for integration many functionally methods as a
component utility service, we use sequence diagram model to design it. For the further step, sequence
diagram as addition methods within scrath script inside a model class. Like as shown in Figure 3,
component utility service to create report in the journal entry that is composed with other services.

Sequence Diagram Pelaporan GL

M s_Period M s_Fiscal_Year T r_Journal_Entry

Kadep Akuntansi

getPeriod filterJournal

showJournalPeriod showJournalPosted

getFiscal filterJournal

showJournalFisca showJournalPosted

Figure 3, Sequence diagram as a component utility service in GL

By scaffolding template engine in the django-admin, class model generating application like as shown
in Figure 4, where it is having functionally Crud-Retrieve-Update-Delete (CRUD) as a basic
information system operation and would can testing in a few seconds time. This way will give generic
solution for Test-Driven Development directly in the application to be launching.

6
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Figure 4, The List of data testing in the GL Journal entry application

Within functionally application for CRUD operation on data transaction, it works like as shown in
Figure 5.

Figure 5, The CRUD data transaction in the GL Journal entry application

3. Result and Analyze

In the software development process that is carried out for six months by 2 analysts and 7 developers,
we are working from drafting the model architecture until to implement the application programming
able to produces EIS within 122 features of functionally applications in the seven modules of ERP,
with details in Table 3.

7
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Table 3, The numbers of ERP modules apps

Module Numbers
Financial Accounting 30
Asset Management 18
CRM – Distribution 18
Material – Production 16
Procurement Management 17
Human Resource Management 13
Inventory Management 11

Furthermore within comparison with the features of existing ERP applications such as Open ERP 7.0,
the EIS features that have been devoloped for ERP PT. Iglas have some advantages in functionality,
because the application development is done in Taylor made, but otherwise with minimize scratch
code in programming component of software so that is easy to evaluate end reconstruct, and also
reducing complexity to help better understand on the evolution of enterprise business processes and
their requirements [16].
Such as shown in Table 4 features of Financial-Accounting ERP modules, which have consist of four
business processes that is implemented by 30 functionally applications.

Table 4, Subjective evaluation for ERP PT. Iglas by they IT managers

Business
Activity *Score Open ERP
Process
Delivery of account invoice 80 √
Payment Sales 90 √
Account Delivery of sales return account 80 √
Receivable Delivery of assets sale account 80 √
Payment of asset sales 80 X
Delivery of asset sales payment account 90 X
Delivery of purchase request account 80 √
Expenditures payment 90 √
Account Delivery Expenditures payment account 80 √
Payable Payroll approval 90 √
Delivery payroll account 80 X
Create the cash master 90 X
Create the bank master 90 √
Create the exchange master 90 √
Create the tax master 90 √
Cash/Bank
Statement of Cash 95 √
Statement of Bank 95 √
Displacement Cash / Bank 90 √
Capital investment 85 X

8
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

Business
Activity *Score Open ERP
Process
Creating the Master Account 90 √
Creating the Master Fiscal Year 90 √
Creating the Master Period 90 √
Creating the Master Jurnal 90 √
The Jurnal Entry 95 √
General
The Jurnal Adjustment Entry 85 √
Ledger
The Asset Depreciation Journal Entry 85 X
GL Posting 80 √
Subledger reporting 80 √
Balance reporting 80 √
Loss/Profit reporting 80 √

4. Conclusion
The results of this study concluded, CAF that is composed with Zachman framework and UML fully
supported MDA, and also through implementation of the most advanced method and technology of
AMDD meets with the stages of the RUP process quickly and accurately, and also simple to learn and
adjustment to establish the complexity requirements of EIS that is proofed to develop ERP application.
Because today still a bit of study on the scope of software engineering to arrange EAF for the EIS
development within detail UML modelling determination, so CAF can be implemented as the best
practice reference to determining the artifacts models and documents that supports all works in the
RUP which meets with the standard model and technology today.

5. Related Work
In the next study can be developed pattern of software design[17] and for advance using Service
Oriented Architecture (SOA)[18] for transformation MDA to AMDD, which provides better best
practice in enterprise application development methods.

6. Reference
[1] Rachel Harrison 2009, TOGAF™ Version 9 Foundation Study Guide, (The Open Group : Van Haren
Publishing) chapter 2 p 16
[2] Carla Marques Pereira, Pedro Sousa, A method to define an Enterprise Architecture using the Zachman
Framework, ACM symposium on Applied computing, Pages1366-1371, New York 2004.
[3] J. F. Sowa, J. A. Zachman, Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems
architecture, IBM 1992
[4] Eric Yu, Markus Strohmaier, Xiaoxue Deng Exploring Intentional Modeling and Analysis for Enterprise
Architecture, EDOCW '06. 10th IEEE International 2006
[5] Brian H. Cameron, Eric McMillan, Analyzing the Current Trends in Enterprise Architecture Frameworks,
Journal of Enterprise Architecture pp 60-71, Association of Enterprise Architects 2013
[6] J. van ’t Wout et al. 2010, The Integrated Architecture Framework Explained, (Capgemini SA: Springer)
chapter 4 p 161-200
[7] Nikolaidou M, et al., Employing Zachman Enterprise Architecture Framework to Systematically Perform
Model-Based System Engineering Activities, System Sciences, pp 1 - 10, HICSS '09. 42nd Hawaii
International Conference 2009
[8] A. Fatolahi and F. Shams, An investigation into applyingUML to the Zachman Framework. Information
Systems Frontiers, 8(2):133–143, 2006

9
ICET4SD IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 105 (2016) 012037 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/105/1/012037

[9] Dimitris N. Chorafas 2001, Integrating ERP, CRM, Supply Chain Management, and Smart Material
(Florida:Aurbach)
[10] Bálint Molnár, The Country-specific Organizational and Information Architecture of ERP Systems at
Globalised Enterprises, BUSINESS SYSTEMS RESEARCH Vol.2, No.2, pp.1-56, 2011
[11] Dragan Milicev 2009, Model-Driven Development with Executable UML, (Indiana: Wiley Publishing)
chapter 3 p 27
[12] Scott W. Ambler 2004, et al., Agile Model-Driven Development With UML 2.0, (Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press)
[13] Martin Fowler 2002, et al., Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, (Boston:Addison Wesley)
[14] Hermawan, Riyanarto Sarno, Developing Distributed System with Service Resource Oriented
Architecture, TELKOMNIKA, Vol.10, No.2, pp. 389-399, June 2012
[15] Johan den Haan, DSL development: 7 recommendations for Domain Specific Language design based on
Domain-Driven Design, http://www.theenterprisearchitect.eu/blog/2009/05/06/dsl-development-7-
recommendations-for-domain-specific-language-design-based-on-domain-driven-design/, published may
6 2009
[16] Mike Cohen 2010, Succeding With Agile, (Boston: Addison Wesley)
[17] Frank Buschmann 2007, et al., Pattern Oriented Software Architechture, Volume 5, (New Jersey:John
Wiley & Sons)
[18] Thomas Erl 2007, SOA: Principles of Service Design (New Jersey:Prentice Hall)

10