Enhancing ISO/lEe 25021 Quality Measure

Elements for wider application within ISO 25000

serIes
Dominique St-Louis, Witold Suryn
ETS - Ecole de Technologie Superieure
I d.stlouis@videotron.caJ witold.suryn@etsmtl.cal
Abstract - This article presents an innovative approach to the
determination of a core set of Quality Measure Elements
(QME), and a comparative analysis aimed at enhancing
applicability of ISOIIEG 25021, which are critical to the
ISOIIEG 25000 SQuaRE series of standards. The research
presents the methodology, allowing for moving from an outdated
and extensive set of measures, to a core list of base measures,
which can be further diversified through contexts of use,
parameters, and considerably simplify the development of
derived measures.

Keywords- Software

Quality Measure Elements, Base

Measure, QME Categorization, Knowledge Base Repository.

I.

standard and propose a design that allows for intuitive

construction of derived measures.
This paper describes the development of the process

allowing for selecting quality measures from an existing

catalogue and the method used to determine a core set of

QMEs. Also, the development of a digital knowledge base for

software quality measures proposed over the course of this
research would be one of its most important results, as it
potentially leads to opportunities to further develop the
SQuaRE series.
II.

INTRODUCTION

This research identifies three major opportunities for

improvement of the current ISO/IEC 25021 standard: better
accessibility for the software development industry,
consistency through abidance to ISO software and system

Several eXlstmg scientific articles present critical

judgments of ISO/IEC software quality and measurement
standards. The most renowned analyses are briefly discussed
below.

engineering vocabulary [19] and ISO metrology standard [6],

and finally the design of the standard itself.
Complexity of ISO/IEC 25021, a similar concern to the one
expressed about ISO/IEC 9126, makes using this standard
difficult. It is also the reason why software quality measures
remain a vague or non-existent concept for many companies
to this day. Making the quality measurement-related part of
ISO/IEC 25000 SQuaRE series of standards readily available,
useful, inexpensive to implement, and easy to use, requires
the development of a concise and scientifically sound set of
basic measurement construction modules, as well as Quality
Measurement Elements or QMEs. Consistent adherence to

the measurement theory [6] would improve the credibility of

the whole series of standards, while making it scientifically
correct, increasing its reliability, and enhancing its
trustworthiness amongst the scientific community. As

ISO/IEC 25021 makes the basis for the development of

several other standards in the SQuaRE series (ISO/IEC

25022-23 replace [2], [3] and [4]) the importance of its

correct design is crucial.

ISOIIEG 9126 and its Technical Reports

ISO/IEC 9126 was published as the first

In 1991,

consensus on the terminology for quality characteristics of

software evaluation. Between 2001 and 2004, ISO published
an expanded version containing the quality model and the
measures proposed for this model [8]. The current version of
the ISO/IEC 9126 standard [1][2][3][4] consists of one
normative reference, the Quality models [1], and three
technical reports: External metrics [2], internal metrics [3],
and Quality in use metrics [4].
Researchers have found that ISO/IEC 9126 standard has

some major flaws, even if it seems the best available so

far. For one, the terminology of ISO/IEC 9126 is not
consistent with the classical terminology of measurement
science and engineering, which causes a real concern for the
validity of proposed measures. Also, measures in ISO/IEC
9126 in many cases are not identified and/or classified as
base or derived measures, which stays in conflict with
ISO/IEC 15939 measurement information model [8].

The objective of the presented research was to determine a

different (than in ISO/IEC 25021) approach to defining a
precise set of base quality measures, which would serve as a
basis for further development of the majority of derived

ISO standards 24765 [19] and 25000 both refer to ISO/IEC

15939 [6] definition of terms for base and derived measures

which are:

quality measures. The results obtained provide such set of

base measures that are easy to understand by the software
industry professionals, compliant with ISO/IEC 15939

978-1-4673-2421-2/12/$31.00 2012 IEEE

LITERATORE REVlEW

3120

- Base measure: measure defined in terms of an attribute and the

method for quantifying it.
independent of other measures.

base

measure

is functionally

- Derived measure: measure that is defined as a function of two or

more values of base measures.

vocabulary. Concerning the reorganisation of the measures,

ISO/IEC 25021 has identified and classified a set of base
measures in addition to the current development of other

Abran et al. [8] analyzed the ISO/IEC 9126 standard and

suggested ways to improve it:

The standard should comply with the ISO and general terms

ISO/IEC 15939 [8]. The standard also provides a set of rules

of metrology [10][17].

for the design of QMEs and for verification of the design of

Measures in [1][2][3] and [4] are merged and should be

reorganized into base and derived measures to comply with
ISO/IEC 15939 [10].

Map the information to the measurement model provided by

ISO/IEC 15939 [6].

standards concerning derived measures. Moreover, one of its

key goals was the harmonization and coordination with

Measurement results described by ranges such as [0..1]

could be presented qualitatively. A score of 100% could be
described as excellent, and a score of 80% as ve ry good
[11][12].

existing

QMEs.

provides

the

link

between

2502n-Quality

Measurement

Division

is

made

of

six

standards:

25020: Measurement reference model and guide

25021: Quality measure elements

.25022: Measurement of quality in use (revision of 9126-4)

25023:Measurement of system and software product quality

(revision of 9126-2 & 3)

.25025: Measurement of IS service quality

in the structure of the ISO/IEC 9126 quality model. lung et

leads

to

two

kinds

of

results:

(I)

each

Selection of a Repository of measures

compliance sub-characteristic belongs to its characteristic as

ISO/IEC

9126,

(2) the six compliance

sub

characteristics form a separate dimension [13]. The results of

their research showed an ambiguity in the structures of the
characteristics and sub-characteristics in ISO/IEC 9126. As
for Abran et al. [15] they suggest reviewing the structure of
the Usability model by adding Learnability and Security,
based on their analysis of ISO/IEC 25000 SQuaRE. Chua and
Dayson [14] discovered that the

Feasibility characteristic

adds

Consistency,

specific

factors

such

as

Simplicity,

Legibilityand Col or use. They also suggest adding the Help

sub-characteristic to Usability characteristic and the global
characteristic of Use r satisfaction.

RESEARCH APPROACH

III.

al. argued that the use of the six sub-characteristics of

defined in

content

.25024: Measurement of data quality

Other researchers have also demonstrated the impairments

Compliance

Its

ISO/IEC 9126, and the subsequent SQuaRE series. ISO/IEC

The initial research approach was to propose a set of base

measure elements that would be at the same time science
based

(i.e. following

accessible to

the

metrology

software

principles),

industry

and

useful

utilized

as

and
an

international reference. The catalog of measures was to be

built with

all

the existing quality measures known

international reference
[2][3][4][5] and
standards

no

set of

[7]. Besides of the

other

in

ISO/IEC JTCI documents

internationally

SQuaRE

recognized

series

of

software

measurement standards referring to ISO/IEC 15939 principles

were

found. The measures

published

in

ISO/IEC 9126

standard [2][3][4] were taken as the basis of this research

because they make the foundation for the development of the

In the subject of the implementation of the measures in

industry, Boegh [9] indicated that the measures listed in

SQuaRE series and at the same time the only available

complete set of measures.

ISO/IEC 9126 could not be applied directly because they

entailed a degree of imprecision. In addition, the author
mentioned that engineers in the industry should devote
considerable efforts to redefine the measures and implement
formalized approaches.

Due to the extensive list of measures that were found,

(including

duplicates and synonyms) a turn to a more

simplistic approach was taken. Only measures in ISO/IEC

9126 parts 2, 3 and 4 [2][3][4] were considered for the
experiment. ISO/IEC 25021 was kept in the repository but
only for the final research comparison analysis as it was

ISO/IEC 25000 SQuaRE

considered the control group,

Pushed by its own pace of evolution, the progresses in

while [2][3][4] made the

experiment group.

information technology [8] and the maturity of the industry,

ISO recognized the need of modifications of the past quality

Although ISO/IEC 25021 has already identified a set of

standards. As the result, ISO/IEC SC7 developed a new

base measures, thus dramatically reducing the number of

generation of standards in the software quality domain,

QMEs

creating the Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation

ISO/IEC 25021 were not used for the experiment. This

(SQuaRE) series of standards.

decision was taken in order to differentiate the experiment

proposed

by

ISO/IEC

9126,

QMEs

defined

in

and the control group of QMEs as well as obtaining unbiased

Being the part of this new series ISO/IEC 25021 has the

experiment results for the selection of base QMEs from

purpose "to define and/or design an initial set of QME ..." In

ISO/IEC 9126 repository. Only the final results of this

its 2007 edition of ISO/IEC 25021 [5] ISO/IEC JTCI SC7

research, the core set of QMEs generated by the experiment,

addressed several of the issues identified in ISO/IEC 9126.

was to undergo a comparison analysis with the baseline

For example, the standard is now consistent with the theory

QMEs from ISO/IEC 25021.

of metrology as well as the software and system engineering

3121

Selection of a core set ofbase QMEs

from the technical reports [2][3][4] were added. Information

The base measure elements, even if they primarily apply to

often referenced was added to the database, thus avoiding

the software quality measurement, must be based on the

searching the paper versions of the standard. To enhance the

standard metrology for systems engineering and software,

communication,

ISO/lEe 15939. Metrology is the "science of measurement

rationale,

and its applications" [17]. It "includes all theoretical and

organisation were recorded in distinctive fields of the base.

practical

aspects

of

measurement,

regardless

of

follow-up

questions,

among

comments

the

research

about

team,

classification

or

the

measurement uncertainty and field of application ... " [17].

The repository tool itself played a major part in the success

of this experiment. It eased the search and comparison of text

The entire list of measures published in ISO/lEe 9126

defining the QMEs. Although inexpensive, easy to use,

parts 2, 3 and 4 were identified, then stored in a repository,

readily available, and understood by all team members, the

called "QME Reference Base" 9126-2-3-4 [18]. As Abran

choice of this particular data storage, Excel database, had its

mentioned in [17] the technical reports of ISO/lEe 9126

limitations. It was not strong enough to make a systematic

contain over 250 derived measures and 80 base measures.

analysis of the data it contained. A relational database

management system (RDBMS) would have allowed for more

After the development of the repository [18], the research

volume and capacity, supported more complex data structures

team identified 403 measures including derived and base

and processing, data evolution and development. Information

measures, while ISO/lEe 25021 had identified and defined

in

ISO/lEe

9126

could

more than 67 base measures. Of these 403 measures, only

terminology

from

ISO

have

been

24765

superposed

[19]

to

to

the

in

the

and

the

assist

eight were clearly identified as base measures, and five more

interpretation

of

the

were ambiguous. The numbers presented above (403) are

differentiation

of

the

unrefined

the

information to the measurement model of ISO/lEe 15939

repetitive

(see Figure 8), thus improving the analytical capabilities. In

and,

terminology,

as

it

there

included

was
a

no

large

discrimination
number

of

of

text,

the

QMEs

organization

and

the

mapping

of

the

measures with no classification in term of base or derived

essence, the choice of Excel over a RDBMS was motivated

measures.

strictly by time restriction. Nevertheless, a RDBMS would

have been incontestably a superior repository tool option.

The process presented in Figure 2 summarizes the approach

used in this research for selecting a core set of base QMEs

Core QME determination

from the ISO/lEe 9126 standard. Note that step 6 of the

approach

was

theoretically

verified

but

not

practically

experimented due to absence of published data.

The measures input into the research reference base were

classified, categorized and sorted according to the vocabulary
used in ISO/lEe 9126 standard. Following this step, QME

Base QM E selection

contexts of use were deducted using the metrics information

from

ISO/lEe

information

(6) Verification and validation of the accuracYI repeatability and

repetitivity of each baseline measurement.

9126

technical

encompassed

the

reports.
QME

The

names,

metrics
purpose,

application and measurement method, formula, metric scale,

(5) Testing of each base measure found in step (4) with published data from past or
existing project.

measure type, and target audience. The resulting inventory

allowed for determining and contrasting base measures from
derived measures (see example in Figure 3).
Data

11'9#

(4) Each base measure found in step (3) must pass the criteria of measure element
and measurement method defined in ISO/lEe 15939.

Technical report

91262 External

(3) Identify all common measures found in step (2), and distinguish each
measure according to its contexts of use.

Characteristic

Attractiveness metrics

Sub-characteristic

Interpretation

Interface appearance
customisability

(2) Divide each measure found

in step (1 ) in base elements (must be reduced

to the simplest expression) and identify the contexts of use.

M easure

X=A/B

X is a derived

measure, therefore it

must be decomposed to determine

the base measures which it is

(1)

list all the base

measur es set out in 9126 to 2, 3

and 4

composed of, i . e . A an d B

and identify if the

measure is a derived measure i.e. a composite or a base measure.

QME selection

Choice of storage and analysis tool

The creation of the repository, called the QME reference
base was developed with the Microsoft Excel [18]. The base
and derived measures proposed in ISO/lEe 9126 parts 2, 3,

The

reference

base

was

also

populated

QME base= Number of interface

elements customised in

elements

appearance to user's

Context 1= customised in appearance

2= to u ser s Satisfaction

Satisfaction

Context

B= Number of interface

QME base= Number of interface

elements that the user

elements

wishes to customise

Context 1= user wishes to customise

'

Fig. 3. Example ofdetermination during preliminary analysis ofa base QME

and 4, as well as those identified in ISO/lEe 25021 were all

listed in the reference base or repository.

A= Number of interface

As the next step, harmonization of terms was performed:

quotation mark s, hyphens and spaces were removed, cases

with

more

information relevant to inventory. For example, elements of

traceability allowing locating the source of the information

were replaced with upper or lower case when appropriate, but

words were not changed. Excluding duplicates and using
identical words, the reference base contained:

3122

a set of 121 base measures

a set of 170 derived measures

Note: At this step of the research, derived QME were not supposed to be
found since they had already been broken down into base QME.

Step 4: Validation the core with ISOIIEC 15939

After these adjustments, the reference base underwent

The

several reviews by the research team, each time, thoroughly

previous

steps

greatly

reduced

the

amount

of

examining its information. Below the detailed steps followed

validation work using the templates of ISO/IEC 15939 by

during the reference base development.

focusing on a small core group of QMEs. Validation work

covered options from selecting Root base QME with the

Step 1: Context determination

After each metrics was dissected to extract the base QME,
it had to be determined if this QME had contexts of use. For

largest number of contexts to creating the Singleton base

QME

(measures

less

often

referred

to

or

sparsely

represented).

example, the QME Number of failure has been identified as a

base measure. Its contexts were numerous; it was referred

The research team created a visual model prior to the

several times as a data element of metrics found in ISO/IEC

measurement model validation (with ISO/IEC 15939), to

9126. Below, some exemplary contexts for that QME:

better evaluate the work achieved. The visual template that

maps the Root base QMEs and their various contexts has

- Number of failures detected during defined trial period

- Number of failures emerqed after failure is resolved

been called Contextualized base QME model and is presented

- Number of failures related to transmission

in Figure 4. As for Figure 5, it presents a concrete example of

the QME number of failures and its different contexts of use

Step 2: Grouping of identical and/or similar QMEs

Once all contexts identified and reviewed, identical QME

as described in ISO 9126-2, 3 and 4.

were grouped. This grouping, however, called for some minor

QME names adjustment in cases where contexts were similar.
For example, Number of message for liD related errors QME and
Number of messages for Mean liD fulfillment ratio QME were all

harmonized with a plural term. A number of words in the

reference base were found to use the singular and others the
plural form.
After these initial groupings, there were still several small
groups of base QME remaining. Groupings extension was
created according to the terminology used in ISO/IEC 9126
standards in order to involve more contexts in the existing
Fig.

QMEs. ISO/IEC 24765 [19] was used as disceming judgment

4.

Base and Contextualized QME model view

tool as it is the terminological dictionary known and broadly

Encounter during
operating concurrently
with other software

accepted in software engineering domain.

Step 3: QMEs Categorization

The grouping easily identified a trend: some base QMEs
were original and other base QMEs, without being secondary,
could be extricated from the original QMEs. Secondary base
QMEs could be related to primary base QMEs with reference
contexts.
A QMEs categorization (see Table 1) was developed by
using the same reference base, a field allowing differentiation
of the base QME called "roots" from the other base QME.
The objective was to clearly identifY the primary QME on
which ISO/IEC 15939 measurement model could be applied.

Fig. 5. QME Number of failures and its different contexts of use.

TABLE I

QME CATEGORIZATION

QME
Root base

Contextualized
base

Description

In the following step, for the validation of these Root base

QMEs, measurement models provided by ISO/IEC 15939
were used to prove that the selected base measures met

Original

indeed the requirements of this standard. In order to formally

Caused by other base QME. They are not derived, but

define and assess the Root base QMEs the adjusted template

base QME whose existence is due to the presence of

other QME (e.g. number of errors is a base QME and
number of error messages is also a base QME, but an

based on 15939 standards was created. The ISO/IEC 15939

template had to be adjusted to the context of this research and

error is needed to create an error message).

since many sections of the original template were linked to

Singleton base

Listed on Iy once in the reference base.

derived measures rather than to QME, they were removed,

Obsolete base

No longer relevant due to technology evolution.

e.g. measurement function.

Derived

Derived QME

3123

The practical validation of developed QMEs was the

ISO/IEC 25021 WG6 (Work Group 6). The resulting core set

experimental creation of several derived measures. Figure 6,

of QMEs is also different from this proposed in ISO/IEC

presents

the

Auditability.

outcome

for

Validation of the

derived measure Access

Root base OMEs by testing the

the

measures on existing projects in the industry were not

completed due to confidentiality agreements with partners
and in consequence due to time constraints.

25021. Some of the base measures identified by this research

were

not

presented

in ISO/IEC 25021 and vice versa,

however, the goal of reducing the core set of QMEs from 67

to much smaller number of

21 valid QMEs has been

achieved.
The original measures reference database, which data was

Computed confidence limits

based on the standard

extracted from ISO/IEC 9126-2-3-4, contained 410 lines, one

line per measure. By limiting the validation work to

base OME

result close to the average

__=
::=...... I Access auditability will be
achieved. Very wide
confidence limits suggest a
potentially large departure
and the need for contingency

Root

category and QMEs with numerous contexts 14

base QME were identified (coverage of 245 lines or 60% of

II
'-J!m[IIIIIlIIIlV1

the reference base, see Figure 7).

Number of
To Com

60%
Completed
external

It was estimated that around 70 lines still need to be

validated, what explains the 40% from Figure 7. The 165
remaining lines were rarely referred to by derived measures;
they often applied to a single derived measure, for example:
Fig. 6. QME Number of access and with development of Access auditability
as a derived measure.

Step

of softwa reo
Another interesting finding was that III derived measures

5: Comparison of the developed core set of QMEs

could be created from the 14 identified QMEs. Considering

with ISO/IEC 25021

The research was concluded by a comparative analysis of
the

I/O Utilization, Number of instances of data corruption prevention, Size

Root base OMEs

identified by this research with those

the total of 178 measures found in ISO/IEC 9126-2-3-4, this

gave 62% of coverage (111/178) of all the measures found in

listed in ISO/IEC 25021. The existence of each base QME

this standard. Unfortunately, the coverage ratio could not be

found by the research was verified in ISO 25021. When

verified against SQuaRE list of derived measures since

possible,

standards are still under development.

information

such

as

definition,

measurement

method, and so on was compared. See Table 2 for details.

V.
TABLE 2

A few enhancements could be provided by the 2502n

SOME COMPARISON ELEMENTS OF THE CORE SET OF QMEs

Findings
Core size

This research
21 measures
Number of failures
Number of faults

Base
measure
comparison

Number of messages
=>Error context
Number of internal
functions
Number of external
functions "feature"

ISO 25021
67 measures (22 initial measures
plus extensions)
Number of failures
Number of system Failures
Number of faults (code)
Number of faults (design)
Number of faults (requirements)
Number of errors
Number of error messages
Number of messages

division standards to make its use more widespread.

Distribution of 2502n division standards in a digital format,

like a knowledge database, would attract a larger population
of software quality engineers, and increase its use by the
industry.

Consistent use of ISO/IEC 24765 vocabulary.

Systematic use of ISO 15939 measurement templates,
providing the mapping of each QME to strengthen the
scientific base and the design of the standard.

N/A

The standards provided by ISO are prepared on paper or as

PDF files. This is considered as a limitation for users, since

N/A

they must go through several documents in order to find the

Duration

N/A

RECOMMENDATIONS

necessary

measure

elements

for

their

projects.

The

recommendation of providing a digital knowledge base (see

IV.

RESULTS

Figure 8) to the industry is one of the most important findings

The presented research applied a different method of

of this research.

determination of the core set of QMEs than the one used by

3124

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

ISO 25025

This article has been developed in the context of a research

project
Knowledge

Knowledge

base

base

ISOl1EC

ISOI1EC

realized

Montreal,
Guillaume

at

Canada.

Ecole
The

Bellosguardo,

de

Technologie

authors

would

Salah-Eddine

like

Superieure,
to

thank

Benbrahim

and

Charles Hebert for their contribution to this research. Finally,

the authors are grateful to fellow students of class MGL842
(20II) for their valuable input.

REFERENCES
Server

Creation

Server

[1]

Tool Server

[2]

With this recommendation, some practical issues could be

addressed:

Gather all software measurements information on a single

storage platform.

Provide an embedded process to create new measures, base

or derived, associated to a specific business domain or
project, software or component.

Develop

graphical

engines

to

build

thus, letting ISO be the guardian of the data, while allowing

to

globally

share

or

protect

their

own

measurement information to other ISO users.

Other directions for the refinement of this research are:
The

application

of

the

same

analysis

method

to

the

measures listed in ISO/IEC 25021 in order to determine

other contexts of measurement since the measures provided
in ISO 25021 are also based on ISO 9126-technical reports.

Adding new QMEs that reflect current development trends

such as Agile programming. Although this issue came up as
a side effect of this research, it seems logical that the
standard evolves in this direction.

Removing QMEs that are no longer used due to technology

[4]

[5]

Adding the definition of QME context as a parameter

complementing

measurement

method

and

measurement

unit. The 2502n division will surely provide the derived

measures, but adding the method linking derived measures
and QMEs would supplement the information already in the
standards.

To improve the ISO/IEC 2502n division standards, the use

of a digital content, as proposed in this paper, would be
beneficial to the IT industry. A database support and user
friendly applications that allows quality engineers to quickly
navigate and research would be a major improvement to these

activities

Organization for Standardization.

SC7, ISO/IEC DTR 25021-2011: Software Engineering - Software
Product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - Quality

[7]

Measurement Process, Geneva, Switzerland: international Organization

for Standardization.
IEEE Std. 1061-1998, Standard for a Software Quality Metrics

[8]

Methodology,revision,IEEE Standards Dept.,Piscataway, N.J., 1998

Abran, R. E. Al-Qutaish, J. M. Desharnais, and N. Habra, "An

[9]

Software

Engineering

Software

Information Model for Software Quality Measurement with ISO

Standards," in Proceedings of the International Conference on Software
Development (SWDC-REK),Reykjavik,Iceland,2005. pp. 104-116.
J. Boegh, "Certifying Software Component Attributes," IEEE Software,
Vol. 23,No. 3,2006,pp. 74 - 81.

[10] A. Abran, R. E. Al-Qutaish, and l-M. Desharnais, "Harmonization

issues in the updating of the ISO standards on software product
quality," Metrics News: Journal of the Software Metrics Community,
Vol. 10,No. 2,2005,pp. 35-44.
[II] A. Abran, R. E. AI-Qutaish, and l Cuadrado-Gallego, "Analysis of the
ISO 9126 on Software Product Quality Evaluation from the Metrology
and ISO 15939 Perspectives WSEAS Transactions on Computers, Vol.
5, No. 11,2006,pp. 2778-2786.
[12] A. Abran,R. E. AI-Qutaish, and J. Cuadrado-Gallego, "Investigation of
the Metrology Concepts in ISO 9126 on Software Product Quality
Evaluation," Proc. Of the 10th international Conference on Computers
(lCComp'06),Vouliagmeni,Athens,Greece,2006,pp. 864-872.
[13] H.-W. Jung, S.-G. Kim, and c.-S. Chung, "Measuring Software
Product Quality: A Survey of ISO/IEC 9126," IEEE Software, Vol. 21,
No. 5,2004,pp. 89-92.
[14] B. B. Chua and L. E. Dyson, "Applying the ISO 9126 Model to the
Evaluation of an e-Learning System," Proc. Of the 21st Conference of
the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary
Education (ASClLITE'04),Perth,Australia,2004, pp. 184-190.
[15] . Abran, A. Khelifi, W. Suryn, and A. Seffah, "Consolidating the ISO
Usability Models," Proc. Of 11th International Software Quality

Metrology (VIM), Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for

Standardization,2008.
[17] A. Abran, Software Metrics and Software Metrology, IEEE Computer
Society,John Wiley & Sons Inc.,New Jersey,2010.
[18] QME Reference Base V2.0,2011 (not published).
[19] ISO/IEC FDIS 24765-2009: Systems and software engineering Vocabulary, Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for

standards. The tools, such as an automatic calculation of

measurement

ISO/IEC TR 9126-4-2004: Software Engineering - Product Quality Part 4: Quality in Use Metrics, Geneva, Switzerland: International

Measure Elements.
ISO/IEC
IS
15939-2007:

derived measures could also be considered. Furthermore,

quality

International

Management Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 2003.

[16] ISO/IEC, International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in

CONCLUSION

software

Switzerland:

[6]

evolution.

Standardization,200I.
ISO/IEC TR 9126-2-2003: Software Engineering - Product Quality Part 2: External Metrics, Geneva, Switzerland:
International
Organization for Standardization,2003.
ISO/IEC TR 9126-3-2003: Software Engineering - Product Quality Part 3:
Internal Metrics, Geneva,
Organization for Standardization.

Provide secure and remote access to all the information,

organisations

[3]

appropriate

measurement models.

ISO/IEC 9126-1-2003: Software Engineering - Product Quality - Part

1: Quality Model. Geneva. Switzerland: International Organization for

Fig. 8. QME Knowledge base.

could

easily

be

integrated to existing development processes. Hence, making

it a great tool for improving software quality overall.

3125

Standardization.