Re: Requirements document

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed Aug 06 2003 - 18:16:09 CDT

Sounds right to me. Glad to know we agree. I look forward to your
primary doc draft.



At 4:25 PM -0600 8/6/03, VanL wrote:
>I have been asked to come up with a requirements document for EVM.
>However, I am unsure at what level I should write or to what level
>of detail, I should go.
>For example, requirements documents can be written at a high level
>(naming and generally describing the different parts of a system) to
>the most detailed level (coding standards, API requirements) and
>everywhere in between. We will probably need every level of
>documentation at some point, so I a slightly unsure of where to
>That said, starting is necessary somewhere, and so I propose working
>from the general to the specific. The first document (primary doc)
>will name and generally describe the high-level functioning of the
>system. This will then be posted for comment, clarification, and
>change. Upon general approval of the primary doc, moderately
>high-level documents (secondary docs) will be written about each of
>the main parts of the system identified in the primary doc. Each
>secondary doc will reference by name the portion of the primary doc
>that it is expanding upon. Upon completion of the secondary docs,
>tertiary docs will be written.
>This will continue until the group feels that the requirements have
>been completely specified.
>I invite everyone in the group to comment; if this plan is
>acceptable to everyone, the primary doc draft that I have been
>working on will be posted thereafter.

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Sun Aug 31 23:17:02 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 23:17:17 CDT