What constitutes a proper scientific result in Computer Science? I work at a university at an Information Technology department. My colleagues claim we are 'computer scientists'. However, from what I observed, most of our work is pure implementation and often follows the Engineering Method, not the Scientific Method (see this page). What is the proper scientific output for research on a real life problem (how to transform a data model encoded in XML Schema into a useful web form for entering/editing data) that involves implementation of a new software (a new data model annotation language and a web form generator software)? Is the resulting software a scientific or an engineering result? What would constitute a proper scientific result?
Coming from a similar research area myself, I can say that in practice the borders between science and engineering are often not clear-cut in applied computer science. 

That being said, usually, the starting point of our  research is indeed a hypothesis, but more of the style it is possible to build a system that does X using Y in order to achieve Z. (and, consequently, this new way is better in some meaningful regards than the traditional way of doing it via X^*). Naturally, the way to falsify such an hypothesis is to set out and do a proof-of-concept, optimally in a realistic setting, and compare it against the traditional way.

Note that the proof-of-concept implementation here is not the scientific output. It is a vehicle for scientific validation. The scientific output is the knowledge that X can indeed be usefully done via Y to achieve Z. Maybe, the proof-of-concept can be improved into an open source tool or product (either by the researchers directly or by partner companies), but this productization is not science anymore - this is pure engineering (we know that it can be done, but now it needs to be done properly, which takes time, effort, and domain knowledge - all things that researchers often don't have in spades).

As such, to answer your question:


  Is the resulting software a scientific or an engineering result?


It is not the scientific result, but it was used to validate the scientific result. It may be considered an engineering result (depending on the quality of the proof-of-concept).


  What would constitute a proper scientific result?


I strongly dislike the term proper in this context, as it implies an ordering of value between science and engineering.