RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com]
> With reference to: "2. Use glossary definitions to simplify and shorten all
> Success Criteria for shared or ambiguous terms":
> Comment: is the word "shared" needed?
> A term may appear in multiple places but if its meaning is not ambiguous then it
> does not need a definition.
> A term even if used only once  may need a definition  if:
> - it is used in a manner  that is not in line with what is generally understood to
> mean or convey.
> - or to limit its meaning to a  specific interpretation  among multiple possible
> interpretations
>
> This is what "ambiguous"  generally conveys but it might be helpful to expand
> along the lines suggested.
[Jason] Technical terms are usually unambiguous, but can still profit from definition if they are likely to be unfamiliar to portions of the anticipated audience.

I don't think "shared" is strictly needed, but neither do I insist on change. This is only an internal guide to be used by the working group in developing success criteria, after all - not a formal document.


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________

Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2016 15:51:37 UTC