Proposed Process

["Daniel Greenwood" <dang@MIT.EDU>]

Hello all,

Below, please find a suggested process map for the TC that Jason and I
worked out.  It gets less detailed further out in the process.  Based upon
discussions and consensus with John McClure, and the vast majorities on the
straw polls during our last conference calls, we have decided to dispense
with further discussion about the so-called "presentation" issue at this
point.  That means we can go back to cranking on our general requirements
and our base-line scenarios.  I am going to propose that we sharpen each
scenario considerably, so as to be able to draw out business and functional
requirements from them.  We will also be looking for each member of the TC
to contribute a "benchmark contract", which we can use as a representative
example to test out our ideas upon.  Meanwhile, the TC has determined that
we should be able to reach a fairly rapid consensus on the structural model
for the contracts, and so have agreed to take that on at this phase as well.
For the next meeting, we'll return to the original proposed agenda from our
last meeting and pick up where we left off to entertain the presentation
issue.  If there are any new or different agenda items, please contact me.

Here is the proposed process:

//process//

Requirements Process:

1. Finish the structural markup and scenarios at the same time.

a) Structural Markup
i) Clause Model
- Jason to document the principles/requirements the clause model is
intended to address
- seek consensus around the clause model requirements document
(including a vote if necessary)
- Jason to propose a clause model which meets the requirements
- seek consensus around the clause model (including a vote if necessary)
- document the clause model

ii) Front Matter and Back Matter dealt with later in the requirements
process

b) Scenarios: Web site will include each scenario, so we know what we
are talking about.  Work with proponents to:
i) Track each scenario to Jason's Framework
ii) Establish any special "functional" or "business" requirements for
each proposed scenario (consider use case type diagrams)
iii) Do a "cross-scenario" analysis, resulting in a consolidated
information items document.

c) Finished requirements document for the semantic (legally charged
characterizations,
like "indemnity clause" or "liability") and other non-structural (i.e.:
sequencing,
application logic hooks, etc.)

Draft the Data Model

2.  Establish the "data model" for the TC, based upon the information
items

Specification Drafting Process

3. Establish the basic content of the draft specification.
a) This will include the agreed upon structural markup and be
traceable back to the overall requirements.
b) If modular, then consider assigning work groups to work on each
part.
c) Finish first official specification 1.0

//end process//

Thanks,
 - Dan Greenwood

==============================================
|  Daniel J. Greenwood, Esq.
|  Director, E-Commerce Architecture Program
|  MIT School of Architecture and Planning
|  77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 7-231
|  Cambridge, MA 02139
|     http://ecitizen.mit.edu
|     or http://www.civics.com
|     dang@mit.edu
==============================================