- From: Andy Heath <andyheath@axelrod.plus.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 21:18:52 +0000
- To: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Indie UI <public-indie-ui@w3.org>
I am personally in favour of a single document for this. The main reason is that I suspect we *will* find scenarios that are met by a combination of Events and User Context requirements - at least they will be met by the use of both - not completely sure its requirements from both. A second argument is: if we do it with one document we *can* write stuff that goes across them both if needed (but we don't have to) - its much harder to do that with two separate docs. One doc gives us more flexibility later (though that seems counter-intuitive, it is the case imho). andy > I'm starting work on a formal requirements doc for IndieUI, based on the > work we did at the last Face to Face meeting, and wanted to get input on > whether we expect to publish a single requirements document for all of > IndieUI, or separate ones for Events and User Context. I was expecting > to cross this bridge later, but it affects the name of the source I > would commit to the repository, so would like to answer sooner. > > Regardless of the decision we take for the formal requirements, I think > we would continue to work on the two sets of requirements mostly > separately, as we've been doing. So I don't see this affecting current work. > > Advantages of putting the two sets of requirements in one doc: > > * We show a unified plan for IndieUI 1.0; > * It's easier to show how scenarios are met by a combination of Events > and User Context requirements - if there are cases where that's > valuable; > * The doc can still be organized into sub-sections to separate the > requirements somewhat; > * We only have one formal deliverable to push through the bureaucracy; > * This will encourage us to update the requirements more often, since > an update to either Events or User Context triggers a republication > of the entire set. > > Advantages of separting them: > > * If Events and User Context are quite different from each other, it's > less confusing to have separate requirements; > * It's easier to work on them on completely separate timelines; > * They can focus on meeting different scenarios. > > I lean towards having a single requirements document (the first version > of which would only have Events requirements). But it's not a strong > leaning, I want to get other preferences. > > Michael > > -- > > Michael Cooper > Web Accessibility Specialist > World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative > E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org> > Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/> > andy andyheath@axelrod.plus.com My daughter is raising money for a charity that is sending her to Malawi, Africa to support AIDS orphans. Should you wish to donate to the charity you can do so on http://gemmaafrica.org.uk -- __________________ Andy Heath http://axelafa.com
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 21:19:24 UTC