RE: Requirements: one doc or two?

I am in favor of a single document - in the long run - though I realize that
is not practicable now.

Katie

-----Original Message-----
From: Janina Sajka [mailto:janina@rednote.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:44 PM
To: public-indie-ui@w3.org
Subject: Re: Requirements: one doc or two?

I'm inclined toward two requirement docs, if for no other reason than that
we're well progressed on events but still struggling to define even scope
for user context.

Janina

Michael Cooper writes:
> 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/>
> 

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
	Indie UI			http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/

Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2013 02:09:19 UTC