[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] RE: Requirements and Scope Documents?
John Evdemon wrote: >We're working with an established spec. I'm (once again) not sure why >we need to write a requirements document for an established spec. > > We do have an established spec and it is a waste of time to reverse-engineer the requirements that led to this spec just for the purpose of having them written down. But, the TC consists of around a hundred members who have joined in order to contribute to the development of the spec. We can't expect people to participate and contribute if they do not all have an understanding of what the spec is about. The recent discussion about execution vs modeling vs authoring stems from that simple fact. Should I spend my employeer's time contributing ideas to improve the usefulness of the spec to address XML authoring if that was never a requirement? Should Edwin contribute an example for using coordination protocols if that is not a requirement? And so forth. The authors made a conscious decision to target the spec to solve a particular set of requirements. And given that we are working on an established spec, I believe that for the most part we have well defined requirements. Some of them are implicit and well understood. Other are not. If the TC is to make any forward progress it need to consider clearly specifying some of these requirements so they are understood to the larger group. arkin
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]