## 3 Validation and Experimentation
### Empirical Validation
#### 3.2.3 Qualitative  
The purpose of the proposal is to permit software engineers and domain experts to write the least code possible with a faster outcome in creating APIs and web pages without any complications. To determine if this was achieved, we conducted a qualitative study followed by an experiment that was introduced with final-year students pursuing a degree in computer engineering. The purpose of the study was to gather the opinions from the students of their thoughts on the proposal, specifically compared with other applications on the market. The fundamental evaluation sought from the students was what additional benefits the proposed RestRho provides to what already exists. The qualitative study was conducted via a usability questionnaire that was based on [50]; 39 students responded to the 7 questions presented in the table below (see Table 7). From the usability questionnaire, a total of five themes emerged from the responses gathered from 39 students. The themes are \"Validity\", \"Utility\", \"Usability\", \"Ease\", and \"Security\". Provided below is an analysis of the usability questionnaire responses, including an analysis and description of each of the themes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c l} \hline \hline
**No.** & **Question** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{1} & What do you think about the DBRestRho and SQLRho languages for \\  & creating web pages on the proposed RestRho? Do you think this could \\  & offer additional benefits compared to other RESTful API Server options? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{2} & What do you think would be the main advantages of being able to create \\  & web pages using the proposed RestRho? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{3} & What do you think would be the main advantages of being able to create \\  & web microservices using the proposed RestRho? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{4} & Imagine that you are developing a web project, and you need to use \\  & templates to speed up the process. How do you think Template Engines \\  & (e.g., Handlebars) could make this job easier for you? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{5} & Would you like to share any idea or additional suggestion about the \\  & functionalities proposed in the RestRho to create web pages? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{6} & What aspects do you consider negative of the RestRho? \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{7} & What aspects do you consider positive of the RestRho? \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Usability questionnaire deployed to 39 students following an experiment to gauge the validity of the proposed RestRho. Figure 14: Correlation between the dimensions utility and ease of use. Validity  
Validity intends to determine how well the proposed RestRho addresses the needs of software engineers and domain experts. This theme specifically explores whether the users' opinions reflect the intended benefits of the proposal: does the proposed RestRho provide additional benefits to what already exists. In addition to benefits, the questionnaire explored the positive features of RestRho. Question one of the usability questionnaires (see Table 7) resulted in both positive and negative responses regarding the RestRho validity (see Figure 15). Positive and negative responses determined the validity of the server displayed as valid or invalid, respectively, whereas blank responses or responses such as _\"I have no opinion\"_ were deemed neutral, as they were not classified as positive nor negative. The majority of students indicated the validity of RestRho, with many indicating the benefits of utilizing DBRestRho and SQLRho languages as they are based on common languages such as SQL, JSON, and JavaScript. _\"In my opinion, the DBRestRho and SQLRho languages are quite easy to understand and implement.