If I may attempt to translate Jack's message, I would say that by asking why
a given functionality that is proposed is necessary we will build better
requirements for the envisioned system. That's because requirements should
not be based on hunches that we provide but rather on objectives that the
organization or the individuals who will use the system need to achieve.
Asking why successively is a known process for finding the root cause of a
problem. By asking why on a piece of requested functionality we will get
into questions of who is the intended user, what they expect from the
system, why is the system necessary etc. You can read Alan Cooper's good and
fun article about goal-directed design at:
goal-oriented avocate is Alistair Cockburn who wrote a whole book on use
cases and goals, "Writing effective use cases."
From: Eric Armstrong [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: jeudi, 13. septembre 2001 03:48
Subject: Re: [unrev-II] Semantic Community Web Portal
Jack Park wrote:
> I am imagining that, in the tree structure that Nexist presently uses,
> "children" of a Question (e.g. Ideas and Questions) can move around in
> their placement on the childNodes list. That's not hard to do.
> that's really an indepth implementation issue.
> Could we back up, instead, and apply a "recursive Why?" approach to
> points you make below and try to arrive at an ontology of ultimate
> requirements for the system you propose?
I'm sure we could, if I understood what you said. Experience tells me
you are undoubtedly asking for something valid. Now if I could only find
Wanna try again??
Or should we sit down and work through it?
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
List owner: unrev-IIemail@example.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Sep 13 2001 - 05:55:35 PDT