- From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:09:22 -0800
- To: Andy Heath <andyheath@axelrod.plus.com>
- Cc: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Indie UI <public-indie-ui@w3.org>
I don’t have a strong opinion for one or two *requirements* documents, as long as the specifications can remain two separate documents. On Dec 17, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Andy Heath <andyheath@axelrod.plus.com> wrote: > 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 22:09:51 UTC