From: Adriano Comai (comai@analisi-disegno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 19 2002 - 05:38:19 EST
I need your opinions.
I appreciate, at a generic level, the definition of a requirement from Incose: 'an expression of a perceived need that something be accomplished or realised'.
But it seems to me that every requirement, and every "requirements set", has a story. It is expressed (set aside the fact that there are implicit ones, too), analyzed, sometimes agreed upon in a contract, sometimes discarded from the customer (if for example it conflicts with other, more important, requirements), may be changed after an agreement, and so on. Maybe, at the end, it is satisfied.
My questions:
1) Is it possible to specify a state machine for requirements? 2) If yes, is there some consensus about a lifecycle for requirements? 3) If not, isn't "requirements" a very fuzzy word?
Adriano Comai
www.analisi-disegno.com
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: owner-re-online@it.uts.edu.au
> [mailto:owner-re-online@it.uts.edu.au]Per conto di Andrew Gabb
> Inviato: martedi 17 dicembre 2002 3.15
> A: RE-online
> Oggetto: Re: [re-online] Requirements & Design
>
[...]
> Firstly I'll give my definition of 'requirement': 'an expression of
> a perceived need that something be accomplished or realised'.
> Rationale for this carefully constructed definition, and some notes
> on the deficiencies in other definitions, is provided in the paper
> 'Requirements Categorization' at http://www.incose.org/rwg/.
[...]
> Andrew
> --
> Andrew Gabb
> email: agabb@tpgi.com.au Adelaide, South Australia
> phone: +61 8 8342-1021, fax: +61 8 8269-3280
> -----
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> To send a message to this mailing list send it to re-online@it.uts.edu.au.
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email
> majordomo@it.uts.edu.au with the
> message `unsubscribe re-online' in the BODY of the mail.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Fri Feb 21 2003 - 11:30:49 EST