Re: Fwd: SIMPLER requirements ordering (due April 14)

On 04/12/2017 10:42 AM, Daniel Burnett wrote:
> After addressing the requirements of greatest interest to the group
> we will repeat the process with the requirements not yet addressed,
> so the ones you don't mark in your top 10 may be addressed later.

Digital Bazaar has filled out the spreadsheet here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Qx-i9raLULuU2Px0EGZsPn4KFFuxXxqVtziT6IhiGjY/edit

Note that we picked things in a bit of a strange way as there are
critical requirements that, if not met, result in a system that does not
work. Key discoverability is an example of this. During our first pass,
we ended up allocating all of our points to 10 things that the system
MUST have to be commercially viable.

So, we removed all 10 of our allocations and moved our points to things
that assume the critical requirements. Our votes are for the
higher-order requirements that assume the critical features that the
spec already caters to.

I don't know how this will play out in practice, but if things that we
see as vital to the healthy operation of the ecosystem are not seen as
critical to the work, we'll most likely point that out and then see
where the group wants to go from there.

A better approach may be to put all of these things in high/medium/low
buckets and then identify items in the "high" bucket that, if not done,
would result in a non functional system. We would then prioritize what's
left. Or we could leave out critical requirements altogether,
understanding that those are high priority.

In any case, let's make this first pass and see where we are after that.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built
http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/

Received on Thursday, 13 April 2017 16:55:09 UTC