Re: Proposed requirement: 2.10.4 Constraint Violations Reporting Details

> On 27 Feb 2015, at 08:24, Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
> 
> @Richard, the user story S34 motivates this requirement, if you think this requirement is not covered I could write an additional one or extend the existing one

Thanks for the pointer, Dimitris. I think a little bit more detail in S34 would be good. The current story says that “only a true/false result would be inadequate”, but it also says that one needs to know “where violations are found”, which seems to motivate detailed validation reports. So some specifics that explain why violations must be countable would be good.

Thanks,
Richard

Received on Friday, 27 February 2015 12:20:54 UTC