CISC474 G05, Spring 2005

Group Assignment G05

This assignment is the final assignment you will do in your temporary groups. It involves doing a "wrap-up" of your Hilfbar application.

It consists of the following parts (be sure to read all four steps before starting... this isn't necessarily the order in which you should do them.)

(1) Update the web site that you built explaining the design of the project (the one you built back in February) to reflect the final delivered application. Be sure you update your database description, description of the functionality and user interface.

(2) Create a final, commented and cleaned up copy of your development environment as a gzipped tar file. Include in the top level directory a file called README.TXT that explains any procedures you have in place for deployment of the application (e.g. shell script, ant files, etc.). Also, each source file MUST have at (or very near) the first line, a comment indicating the source filename, the TG group number, and the full names of all group members, and a brief (one line) description of the purpose of that file in the context of the entire application. The README.TXT file should also start with this information, and should also include the URL of the web site that describes your final delivered application. Submit the gzipped tar file via WebCT (only one group member needs to submit it.) Submit this tar file no later than noon Thursday 4/21.

(3) Create a printout of all of your source files. Put the README first on the stack.

(4) Add to that printout screen shots of a brief demo of the application's functionality, as well as screen shots of your web site that describes the application.

(5) Staple all your printouts together, or put into a three ring binder or other folder (so that they are all attached together somehow), and bring to class to submit on Thursday 4/21

Grading of P05
This assignment will be worth 100 points, broken down as follows:

(1) Clarity of source code: (30 pts)

0-20/30: Looks like very little effort went into making the code readable. Difficult to impossible to figure out what is happening in the code, even if you understand Servlet/JSP programming.
21/30: Code than can be understood, but you really have to work at it a bit.
24/30: Code that can be read and understood, but looks a bit sloppy here and there. Comments are there, but not enough to fully follow what is going on. A bit messy in places.
27/30: Very nice clean, understandable code, with plenty of comments. The kind of code that everyone hopes to be given to maintain.
30/30: Code that is so clean it practically squeaks... comments are so artful that one might read the code just for pleasure.

(2) Functionality of final delivered application (30 pts)

0-15/30: Product (as designed) is not useful to end user (note: if design is sound, but product doesn't work due to bugs, those deductions are taken under "correctness".
16-21/30: Product as designed does something useful, but lacks certain very basic features needed to meet user needs.
22-24/30: Does the basics, but nothing beyond that.
25-27/30: A very nice job. Covers all the basics, plus at least one significant "additional" feature that really help the users of the application.
28-30/30: Covers all the basics, but has two or more truly innovative features. Shows creative thinking about how to approach the problem. One might anticipate that in a competitive situation, others would envy and imitate this product.

(3) Correctness of delivered code (15 pts)

20/20: Does everything it is supposed to do.
16-19/20: No more than one minor bug in final delivered product (something that doesn't work the way it is "supposed to".
11-15/20: No more than one major bug in final delivered product (something that doesn't work the way it is "supposed to".
0-10/20: Two more more distinct major or minor bugs in final delivered product.

(4) Web page description (15 pts)

14-15/15: Web page is a work of art; a pleasure to read, and very clearly and accurately presents the final delivered product.
12-13/15: Web page is basic, clear, easy to navigate, and for the most part, accurately describes the final product.
0-11/15: Web page is difficult to navigate, contains typos or sloppy bits, or deviates significantly from the final product.

(5) Following submission instructions (10 pts)

10/10: Followed all instructions given in this document for submission, plus any other "common sense items" not explicitly mentioned here, but that would be normally expected in submission of an assignment in a college course (e.g. neatness, stapling or fastening your papers together in some way, etc. )

0-9/10: Deviation from the instructions given; deductions at the discretion of the instructor/TA.

Total: 100 points.

Due: WebCT submission: noon 4/21/2005, paper submission in class 4/21/2005.