RE: [techs] proposal to replace use of "rules"

Wendy A Chisholm writes:
 > What I'm proposing is that a technique is a specific strategy (e.g., "Use 
 > the title element to provide a unique title for a page") and that we 
 > provide supplementary information for that technique (e.g., examples, 
 > descriptions, etc.).
 > Thus, a checklist is list of techniques.   A checklist does not contain the 
 > supplementary information for that technique.

I like this terminology and agree with Wendy's proposal. In fact, it
is entirely consistent with previous practice: we have never given the
term "technique" a precise meaning or sought to define what an
individual "technique" is. We could say that a "technique" is a
statement of the kind which appears in a checklist; in the full
techniques document it may and often will be accompanied as Wendy
indicated by examples/test cases, testability status, version
information/impelmentation support details, notes and commentary.

The only question this leaves open is what to call items that are
included in techniques documents but aren't sufficiently important to
appear in checklist. I propose terming them simply "advice" or
"advisory notes". Under this proposal, a "technique" and the
information accompanying it would constitute a highly structured
entity as defined in our Techniques requirements.

Another terminological proposal: call the statement that would appear
in the checklist a "technique statement", and use the word "technique"
alone to designate the technique statement together with all of the
other required/optional items of information which accompany it.

Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2003 23:04:43 UTC