LC comment for SpecGL : 'Comments on SpecGL Guidelines'

Here is a last call comment from Patrick Curran (Patrick.Curran@sun.com) 
on QA Framework : Specifications Guidelines (and Examples and Techniques)
received by the LC form system.

Submitted on behalf of: N/A
Comment type: Substantive
The comment applies to: "Overall"
Comment title: Comments on SpecGL Guidelines

Comment:
Guideline 1

Checkpoint 1.4 is priority 2, yet it's listed after 1.3 which is priority 3. I suggest listing checkpoints in priority order.


Guideline 3

The Conformance Policy is likely to appear towards the end of a Spec. I suggest ordering the guidelines as they are likely to appear in the
spec. (Besides, it belongs with, and maybe could even be combined with, guidelines 10, 11, 12, and 13.)


Guidelines 4-9

This is a large number of guidelines and checkpoints to deal with
something that's important, but that we wish to discourage (DOVs). (The "or NOT!" language in guideline 9 seems a little too informal, but more substantively, why do we wait until this guideline to express our opinion that DOVs are undesirable.)

Could we combine some or all of these guidelines?


Guideline 10

Checkpoint 10.2 doesn't seem to be directly related to the guideline.


Guidelines 10 - 13

As suggested above, perhaps these could be combined.


Guideline 14

This is a key guideline - I'd like to see it earlier in the list.


Section 3.3

"This... document does not enumerate a list of test assertions". Haven't we agreed that our checklist is (the closest thing to) a list of assertions?



Proposed resolution : 
Restructure guidelines, combining several resulting in a smaller number.
]]

-- 
This comment was submitted through the lastCall form system,
designed by Martin Duerst and Adapted for the QAWG by Olivier Thereaux.

Received on Sunday, 16 March 2003 14:45:32 UTC