From: Andrew Gabb (agabb@tpgi.com.au)
Date: Wed Oct 08 2003 - 21:59:49 EST
David Lightstone wrote:
> Earlier this year there was an ongoing discussion of verification and
> validation. At the time I suspected that multiple contexts/perspectives (I
> think the formal word is ontologies) were present.
There certainly are, David, and I just realised something very important to this discussion. It means I need to say sorry again. Sorry. <G>
In many project cultures, the term 'hard requirement' often means a requirement that *must* be met, ie one which (at least at that point in time) cannot be traded off against other requirements to meet cost and schedule, or when there are technical difficulties. In this context, soft requirements are those which are more amenable to tradeoffs and negotiation.
In my previous posts, I've been using soft/hard more in the meaning of general/specific or murky/clear or high/low level or broad/detailed (or a combination of these). Please read them in that light.
Of course, the two sets of meanings are not totally unconnected.
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 : Wed Oct 15 2003 - 14:23:04 EST