Talk:Requirements engineering

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Specific remarks)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
==General remarks==
 
==General remarks==
 
*Very relevant topic, thorough and well researched article, with a lot of substance for the reviewer to work on :-)
 
*Very relevant topic, thorough and well researched article, with a lot of substance for the reviewer to work on :-)
 +
** '''''Thanks for the complement'''''
 
*Good sample of references and links to other material
 
*Good sample of references and links to other material
 +
** '''''Thanks'''''
 
*You introduce a lot of (apparently cross- and interrelated) concepts, notions, phases etc in which the reader easily gets lost - And therefore sometimes misses your good points on how to conduct proper requirements assessment and definition   
 
*You introduce a lot of (apparently cross- and interrelated) concepts, notions, phases etc in which the reader easily gets lost - And therefore sometimes misses your good points on how to conduct proper requirements assessment and definition   
 +
** '''''I've tried to clear this up, hopefully I succeeded :-)'''''
 
*Some general advice for improvement of the article: 1)Make it clearer for the reader if "requirements engineering" should be understood as a well defined discipline and a coherent standard method of practice resembling e.g. Systems engineering, or is it just a collective term for a set of useful tools ? 2) Consider making your introduction/abstract and discussion/conclusion a bit sharper and mutually coherent
 
*Some general advice for improvement of the article: 1)Make it clearer for the reader if "requirements engineering" should be understood as a well defined discipline and a coherent standard method of practice resembling e.g. Systems engineering, or is it just a collective term for a set of useful tools ? 2) Consider making your introduction/abstract and discussion/conclusion a bit sharper and mutually coherent
  
Line 12: Line 15:
 
===Introductory paragraph===
 
===Introductory paragraph===
 
*Second sentence: Are you referring to requirements as "formalities"? Difficult to understand.
 
*Second sentence: Are you referring to requirements as "formalities"? Difficult to understand.
 +
** '''''Ok, I might see what you mean. I have change the sentence a bit.  The sentence is now: Often, if a project is about creating a new system, then requirements are made to specify the system, in order to create common understanding among the involved parties in a project.'''''
 
*See also general remark, consider rephrasing the paragraph to set the scene for your article better
 
*See also general remark, consider rephrasing the paragraph to set the scene for your article better
 +
** '''''I’m not sure i know what you mean be rephrasing the paragraph? Do your mean the section in general? if yes I have done extra work on it'''''
  
 
===Application context===
 
===Application context===
 
*First sentence: You write that requirements defines the stakeholders, users and customers - is it not the other way round ?
 
*First sentence: You write that requirements defines the stakeholders, users and customers - is it not the other way round ?
 +
** '''''Fixed - Reworked this section'''''
 
*Second sentence: You state the importance of understanding the requirements "completely and unambiguously. That is probably the core of requirements management and requirements "engineering", therefore you should consider elaborating the statement at this point in the article, maybe referring to the section "Req. elicitation" later in the article
 
*Second sentence: You state the importance of understanding the requirements "completely and unambiguously. That is probably the core of requirements management and requirements "engineering", therefore you should consider elaborating the statement at this point in the article, maybe referring to the section "Req. elicitation" later in the article
 +
** '''''Fixed - Reworked this section'''''
 
*Sentences no. 8 and 9 are difficult to understand, consider rephrasing
 
*Sentences no. 8 and 9 are difficult to understand, consider rephrasing
 +
** '''''Fixed - Reworked this section'''''
 
===Acceptance and use===
 
===Acceptance and use===
 
*In general, this section (and even the header itself) is a bit difficult to understand.
 
*In general, this section (and even the header itself) is a bit difficult to understand.
 +
** '''''Fixed - I have gone over the entire section and reworked it. The headline is also been altered.'''''
 
*As mentioned in the general remarks you indicate that "requirements engineering" is a defined discipline or process, but you do not elaborate on or describe it's definition
 
*As mentioned in the general remarks you indicate that "requirements engineering" is a defined discipline or process, but you do not elaborate on or describe it's definition
 +
** '''''Fixed'''''
 
*What is the point of your references to software development issues in the first half of the paragraph?
 
*What is the point of your references to software development issues in the first half of the paragraph?
 +
** '''''Fixed'''''
 
*It is a good idea to give examples like the one of the railway system, but the point is difficult to grasp
 
*It is a good idea to give examples like the one of the railway system, but the point is difficult to grasp
 +
** '''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Creating requirements===
 
===Creating requirements===
 
*In this section you introduce a definition of "requirements engineering" as a Deming-type circular process. Is that correctly understood by the reader? -If so you should consider using the graphic representation more, elaborating on all 4 steps in the circle as they are named on the diagram. As the article is written now it is difficult to see the connection between the "RE Lifecycle" and the issues you elaborate on in the following sections.
 
*In this section you introduce a definition of "requirements engineering" as a Deming-type circular process. Is that correctly understood by the reader? -If so you should consider using the graphic representation more, elaborating on all 4 steps in the circle as they are named on the diagram. As the article is written now it is difficult to see the connection between the "RE Lifecycle" and the issues you elaborate on in the following sections.
 +
** '''''Fixed - I’ve tried to elaborate a little more on requirement lifecycle and I tried to explain it better.'''''
  
 
===Major concepts===
 
===Major concepts===
 
You should consider deleting this header, it does not contribute to the reader's overview of the article, as long as you don't show a coherent whole framework for those "concepts"
 
You should consider deleting this header, it does not contribute to the reader's overview of the article, as long as you don't show a coherent whole framework for those "concepts"
 +
* '''''Fixed - I have deleted this headline, you are right is does not really contribute with anything'''''
  
 
===Requirements elicitation===
 
===Requirements elicitation===
Line 35: Line 49:
 
===Design and validation===
 
===Design and validation===
 
*It becomes a little unclear where we are now in the RE lifecycle?
 
*It becomes a little unclear where we are now in the RE lifecycle?
 +
** '''''I have made a Requirement Life Cycle section that hopefully has cleared that up. :-)'''''
 
===Context===
 
===Context===
 
*You refer to this item as a "phase", bur for the reader it is very unclear where in your RE lifecycle this phase belongs. The considerations you mention in this section is probably clever and relevant, but the reader is lost at this point.
 
*You refer to this item as a "phase", bur for the reader it is very unclear where in your RE lifecycle this phase belongs. The considerations you mention in this section is probably clever and relevant, but the reader is lost at this point.
 +
** '''''Fixed'''''
 
===Functional requirements===
 
===Functional requirements===
 
*Again you refer to this as a "phase in requirements engineering". What phase in what model? I'm afraid many readers would be lost at this point.
 
*Again you refer to this as a "phase in requirements engineering". What phase in what model? I'm afraid many readers would be lost at this point.
 +
** '''''Fixed - I have made it different, I now refer to it as a method, see requirement life cycle'''''
 
*If you believe the snow card is an good example of an applicable method you should consider showing a larger and readable picture, and to explain and elaborate on it. Otherwise don't show it.
 
*If you believe the snow card is an good example of an applicable method you should consider showing a larger and readable picture, and to explain and elaborate on it. Otherwise don't show it.
 +
** '''''Fixed - I have made the picture bigger'''''
 
===Non-functional requirements===
 
===Non-functional requirements===
 
*Your definition of non-functional requirements as "qualities" is interesting, you should consider giving some (authoritative?) references to this definition.
 
*Your definition of non-functional requirements as "qualities" is interesting, you should consider giving some (authoritative?) references to this definition.
Line 45: Line 63:
 
===Requirements management===
 
===Requirements management===
 
*Again you denote this as a "phase" - however this time I believe that we are back on the previously shown RE lifecycle again ?. You should consider explaining to the reader how these "management" (your own denotion) processes you describe here corresponds with the "engineering" processes of your RE lifecycle. Is "Requirement Management" an element or a process within Requirements engineering ?
 
*Again you denote this as a "phase" - however this time I believe that we are back on the previously shown RE lifecycle again ?. You should consider explaining to the reader how these "management" (your own denotion) processes you describe here corresponds with the "engineering" processes of your RE lifecycle. Is "Requirement Management" an element or a process within Requirements engineering ?
 +
** '''''Fixed'''''
 
===Discussion===
 
===Discussion===
 
*It seems to this reviewer that in this section you just repeat your arguments from the "Background" introduction for particular effort on requirements engineering in project work. Consider instead to make some application advice or reflections on the practices and methods you have described, e.g. describe a link between your "requirements engineering" and project management standard practices.
 
*It seems to this reviewer that in this section you just repeat your arguments from the "Background" introduction for particular effort on requirements engineering in project work. Consider instead to make some application advice or reflections on the practices and methods you have described, e.g. describe a link between your "requirements engineering" and project management standard practices.
Line 63: Line 82:
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"among ''the'' involved parties"
 
:"among ''the'' involved parties"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"from a client" => "''of'' a client"
 
:"from a client" => "''of'' a client"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"goal of the product" can a product have "goals" I've heard of projects with goals.. I may be wrong here.
 
:"goal of the product" can a product have "goals" I've heard of projects with goals.. I may be wrong here.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"the developers ''create''" developers can be replaced with 'they' and "they creates" is incorrect (it's a good test to do if it sounds off, change to one of the known words ''I, you, he/she/it, we, You, they'' :)
 
:"the developers ''create''" developers can be replaced with 'they' and "they creates" is incorrect (it's a good test to do if it sounds off, change to one of the known words ''I, you, he/she/it, we, You, they'' :)
 +
*'''''Fixed - I’ve put in ‘Developers create’, otherwise in my opinion it creates a little confusion on who I’m talking about if I put in ‘They’'''''
 
:"to specific" => "to ''specify''"
 
:"to specific" => "to ''specify''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"is suppose" => "is ''supposed''"
 
:"is suppose" => "is ''supposed''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"the basis to get" => "the basis ''for getting''"
 
:"the basis to get" => "the basis ''for getting''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"a iterative" => "''an'' iterative" the usual test for a and an is checking the first letter of the word following it; is it a vowel then it is ''an''  
 
:"a iterative" => "''an'' iterative" the usual test for a and an is checking the first letter of the word following it; is it a vowel then it is ''an''  
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"reflect a product best possible" not sure exactly what is meant here, but I will guess rearranging it to "reflect the best possible product" gives the correct meaning.
 
:"reflect a product best possible" not sure exactly what is meant here, but I will guess rearranging it to "reflect the best possible product" gives the correct meaning.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
The introduction is (besides the above stuff) very well written and explanatory.
 
The introduction is (besides the above stuff) very well written and explanatory.
 +
*'''''Thanks :-)'''''
  
 
===Background===
 
===Background===
 
due to the header it is difficult to see that the text is an introduction to the following sub-headers..
 
due to the header it is difficult to see that the text is an introduction to the following sub-headers..
 +
*'''''I have also removed it, thanks for noticing'''''
 
===Application context===
 
===Application context===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"basis for" => "basis ''of''"
 
:"basis for" => "basis ''of''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"and that is where" => "and ''this'' is where"
 
:"and that is where" => "and ''this'' is where"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"to understand" => "''understanding''"
 
:"to understand" => "''understanding''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"''the'' need", "''the'' problem"
 
:"''the'' need", "''the'' problem"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"is done" => "is ''reached''" or "''has been established''"
 
:"is done" => "is ''reached''" or "''has been established''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"need of" => "need ''for''"
 
:"need of" => "need ''for''"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"be clear defined" => "be ''clearly'' defined"
 
:"be clear defined" => "be ''clearly'' defined"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"It is about" <= speech, and what is ''It'' in this sentence?
 
:"It is about" <= speech, and what is ''It'' in this sentence?
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"creating stable" => "creating ''a'' stable"
 
:"creating stable" => "creating ''a'' stable"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"the destination" <= I think "where you might end" sounds a bit better?
 
:"the destination" <= I think "where you might end" sounds a bit better?
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:I'd scrap "though" and start at "The intention of ''the'' requirements"
 
:I'd scrap "though" and start at "The intention of ''the'' requirements"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:you mix times.. "is" and "would".. use "will"
 
:you mix times.. "is" and "would".. use "will"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"management requirements" ? missing a komma? and then "form" without s
 
:"management requirements" ? missing a komma? and then "form" without s
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"There exists multiple examples" => "''Multiple examples exist''"
 
:"There exists multiple examples" => "''Multiple examples exist''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"because poorly" => "because ''of'' poorly"
 
:"because poorly" => "because ''of'' poorly"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"shows the problems" => "shows ''that'' the problems"
 
:"shows the problems" => "shows ''that'' the problems"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:perhaps use ":" to list the three categories?
 
:perhaps use ":" to list the three categories?
  
 
Perhaps elaborate bit more about the challenge you mention
 
Perhaps elaborate bit more about the challenge you mention
 +
*'''''Fixed - I have elaborated a little bit and given an example :-)'''''
  
 
===Acceptance and use===
 
===Acceptance and use===
 
;layout
 
;layout
 
:a big text like this one can be heavy to take in one chunk.. if you insert more "enter" or I guess in english you call them "breaks" or "new line" you can force the text into sections which are easier to read.
 
:a big text like this one can be heavy to take in one chunk.. if you insert more "enter" or I guess in english you call them "breaks" or "new line" you can force the text into sections which are easier to read.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"requirement''s'' engineering"
 
:"requirement''s'' engineering"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"dominant force of change of products" <= needs some rephrasing to display the actual meaning clearly.
 
:"dominant force of change of products" <= needs some rephrasing to display the actual meaning clearly.
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"the could cause" => "''this'' could cause ''a''"
 
:"the could cause" => "''this'' could cause ''a''"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"Even though" be careful with starting off sentences like that if they stand alone, "on the other hand" might be what you mean.. or you could just decide to state it as "Requirements engineering can be..".
 
:"Even though" be careful with starting off sentences like that if they stand alone, "on the other hand" might be what you mean.. or you could just decide to state it as "Requirements engineering can be..".
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"for example" => "for example'';''"
 
:"for example" => "for example'';''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:again "requirement''s'' engineering" be consistent in that one, not mentioning it again.
 
:again "requirement''s'' engineering" be consistent in that one, not mentioning it again.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"applies" => "''also'' applies"
 
:"applies" => "''also'' applies"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:try to read the sentence without the insert.. "components which.." consider revision of the last part.
 
:try to read the sentence without the insert.. "components which.." consider revision of the last part.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"There exist several standards" => "''Several standards exist''"
 
:"There exist several standards" => "''Several standards exist''"
 +
*'''''Fixed - The sentence has changed, so I’ve chosen to go with what is says now.'''''
 
:"define''.''" and "where in" => "''In''"
 
:"define''.''" and "where in" => "''In''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"likely the" => "likely ''that'' the"
 
:"likely the" => "likely ''that'' the"
−
 
+
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
Interesting and with substance
 
Interesting and with substance
−
 
+
*'''''Thank you :-)'''''
 
===Creating requirements===
 
===Creating requirements===
 
;Layout
 
;Layout
 
: remember the header issue
 
: remember the header issue
−
 
+
*'''''Fixed - Renamed the header and fixed the issue regarding level of headlines.'''''
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"different ways" <= perhaps add an indicator of ammount? several, many, some.
 
:"different ways" <= perhaps add an indicator of ammount? several, many, some.
 +
*'''''Fixed - I have elaborated a little more on which ways im talking about. So i think it’s not necessary to put an amount on it.'''''
 
:"accordingly" => "according"
 
:"accordingly" => "according"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"a system" => "''the'' system" ?
 
:"a system" => "''the'' system" ?
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"suppose''d''"
 
:"suppose''d''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"achieve ''the''"
 
:"achieve ''the''"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:"best as possible." => "the best." ?
 
:"best as possible." => "the best." ?
 +
*'''''Fixed - Removed words while redoing section'''''
 
:ouch.. missing the ''s'' in your text for the picture as well.
 
:ouch.. missing the ''s'' in your text for the picture as well.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"in this article".... are they? which article.. the one I'm reading or the one you are referring to?
 
:"in this article".... are they? which article.. the one I'm reading or the one you are referring to?
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Major concepts===
 
===Major concepts===
 
no intro?
 
no intro?
 +
*'''''Fixed - removed header, didn't really add anything :-)'''''
  
 
===Requirements elicitation===
 
===Requirements elicitation===
Line 137: Line 204:
 
:Again a very large chunk of text.. try to divide it, perhaps using the same scheme as I do with ";The objective technique:" next line ":The objective technique is..." use the preview function to make it look readable and structured.
 
:Again a very large chunk of text.. try to divide it, perhaps using the same scheme as I do with ";The objective technique:" next line ":The objective technique is..." use the preview function to make it look readable and structured.
 
:Beautiful table. well thought.
 
:Beautiful table. well thought.
 +
*'''''Thank you'''''
  
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:req-''s'' again.. is the header or text incorrect?
 
:req-''s'' again.. is the header or text incorrect?
 +
*'''''Fixed - In this case it would be the text. '''''
 
:"to understanding" => "to understand"
 
:"to understanding" => "to understand"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:take out "Though"
 
:take out "Though"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"use full" => "useful"
 
:"use full" => "useful"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"for which the requirements need to fulfill" ? the requirements have to fulfill the surrounding environment?
 
:"for which the requirements need to fulfill" ? the requirements have to fulfill the surrounding environment?
 +
*'''''Fixed - Wups, seems like I have made a double sentence there. Nice spottet, thanks!'''''
 
:"called more like a" speech language => "called a"
 
:"called more like a" speech language => "called a"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"where some like" => "where some''thing'' like"
 
:"where some like" => "where some''thing'' like"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"in to" => "into" (best test.. make the space a deliberate pause when reading)
 
:"in to" => "into" (best test.. make the space a deliberate pause when reading)
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"desire''s''"
 
:"desire''s''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"t''h''rough"
 
:"t''h''rough"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
impressive chapter, very few errors and very understandable.
 
impressive chapter, very few errors and very understandable.
 +
*'''''Thanks :-)'''''
  
 
===Design and validation===
 
===Design and validation===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"minded for" => "minded ''towards''"
 
:"minded for" => "minded ''towards''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"intention" => "intent"
 
:"intention" => "intent"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"phase'',''"
 
:"phase'',''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"useful to" => "useful ''for''"
 
:"useful to" => "useful ''for''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"fulfills ''the''"
 
:"fulfills ''the''"
−
 
+
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
good
 
good
  
Line 165: Line 248:
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"most reflect" => "most''ly'' reflect"
 
:"most reflect" => "most''ly'' reflect"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"the project has" => "of the project"
 
:"the project has" => "of the project"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"establishing context"
 
:"establishing context"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"identifying systems or process''es''"
 
:"identifying systems or process''es''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
only minor stuff
 
only minor stuff
Line 174: Line 261:
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"on''e''"
 
:"on''e''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"meanwhile" => "while"
 
:"meanwhile" => "while"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"''in order'' to leave out any doubt ''regarding'' the goal of the requirement."
 
:"''in order'' to leave out any doubt ''regarding'' the goal of the requirement."
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"exits" => "''exist''"
 
:"exits" => "''exist''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"uses cases" => "use''r'' cases"?
 
:"uses cases" => "use''r'' cases"?
 +
*'''''Fixed - It’s actually suppose to say use cases. It is a technical term.'''''
 
:"in the picture below" <= but I see it above or besides the text?
 
:"in the picture below" <= but I see it above or besides the text?
  
 
the picture is fairly small if you were to see the idea of it without clicking on it.
 
the picture is fairly small if you were to see the idea of it without clicking on it.
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Non-functional requirements===
 
===Non-functional requirements===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:Whoa.. "Quality means..." that sentence needs some serious rework.. think about what it means as it is written now.
 
:Whoa.. "Quality means..." that sentence needs some serious rework.. think about what it means as it is written now.
 +
*'''''Fixed - Redid section, so hopefully it makes more sense now.'''''
 
:"irrespective"? => "regardless"
 
:"irrespective"? => "regardless"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"specify a some" ?
 
:"specify a some" ?
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"There exits ISO standards" => "ISO standards exi''st''"
 
:"There exits ISO standards" => "ISO standards exi''st''"
 +
*'''''Fixed - Sentence has been reworked'''''
 
:"The idea is then" => "The procedure is"
 
:"The idea is then" => "The procedure is"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"system goal''s''"
 
:"system goal''s''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"argument ''of''"
 
:"argument ''of''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"example on list of" => "example ''of a'' list ''with''"
 
:"example on list of" => "example ''of a'' list ''with''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
Perhaps (if possible) move the picture to the right of the text
 
Perhaps (if possible) move the picture to the right of the text
 +
*'''''Fixed - I have made the picture bigger and larger in the left side. It's a little hard to control in the right side'''''
  
 
===Acceptance test===
 
===Acceptance test===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"engineering disciplines" => "engineering discipline"
 
:"engineering disciplines" => "engineering discipline"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"various way''s''" & "testing ''a'' system"
 
:"various way''s''" & "testing ''a'' system"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"should consists" => "should consist" or "consists"
 
:"should consists" => "should consist" or "consists"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Requirements management===
 
===Requirements management===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"activates" ? => "activities"?
 
:"activates" ? => "activities"?
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"in ''a'' more"
 
:"in ''a'' more"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"exi''st''" ok, think of it this way.. exit_, a way out, or more with s.. exist, is present
 
:"exi''st''" ok, think of it this way.. exit_, a way out, or more with s.. exist, is present
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Discussion===
 
===Discussion===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"exi''st''"
 
:"exi''st''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:if you haven't already, search and replace all "requirement engineering" with "requirements engineering"
 
:if you haven't already, search and replace all "requirement engineering" with "requirements engineering"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"size''s''"
 
:"size''s''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"computers systems" => "computer systems"
 
:"computers systems" => "computer systems"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"systems ''have''" as in they have
 
:"systems ''have''" as in they have
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"affect" => "effect" verb vs. noun
 
:"affect" => "effect" verb vs. noun
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"for everyday" => "for every day"
 
:"for everyday" => "for every day"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"consequence''s''"
 
:"consequence''s''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"why today the .... quality" => "why the .... quality today"
 
:"why today the .... quality" => "why the .... quality today"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"be emphasize the" => "be emphasize''d that''"
 
:"be emphasize the" => "be emphasize''d that''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"solution by" => "solution ''in''"
 
:"solution by" => "solution ''in''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"every persons" => "every person"
 
:"every persons" => "every person"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
  
 
===Strength and weaknesses===
 
===Strength and weaknesses===
 
;Grammatical things
 
;Grammatical things
 
:"as wells" => "as well"
 
:"as wells" => "as well"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"Though that the fact .... same" => "The fact .... same though"
 
:"Though that the fact .... same" => "The fact .... same though"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"benefit of ''using''"
 
:"benefit of ''using''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"and ''generate'' higher"
 
:"and ''generate'' higher"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"contribution''s''"
 
:"contribution''s''"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"Though it is" => "It is"
 
:"Though it is" => "It is"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''
 
:"but it is" => "but"
 
:"but it is" => "but"
 +
*'''''Fixed'''''

Revision as of 22:01, 1 December 2014

Contents

Review by MrP

General remarks

  • Very relevant topic, thorough and well researched article, with a lot of substance for the reviewer to work on :-)
    • Thanks for the complement
  • Good sample of references and links to other material
    • Thanks
  • You introduce a lot of (apparently cross- and interrelated) concepts, notions, phases etc in which the reader easily gets lost - And therefore sometimes misses your good points on how to conduct proper requirements assessment and definition
    • I've tried to clear this up, hopefully I succeeded :-)
  • Some general advice for improvement of the article: 1)Make it clearer for the reader if "requirements engineering" should be understood as a well defined discipline and a coherent standard method of practice resembling e.g. Systems engineering, or is it just a collective term for a set of useful tools ? 2) Consider making your introduction/abstract and discussion/conclusion a bit sharper and mutually coherent

Specific remarks

Below please find som specific remarks, adressing particular sections in your article

Introductory paragraph

  • Second sentence: Are you referring to requirements as "formalities"? Difficult to understand.
    • Ok, I might see what you mean. I have change the sentence a bit. The sentence is now: Often, if a project is about creating a new system, then requirements are made to specify the system, in order to create common understanding among the involved parties in a project.
  • See also general remark, consider rephrasing the paragraph to set the scene for your article better
    • I’m not sure i know what you mean be rephrasing the paragraph? Do your mean the section in general? if yes I have done extra work on it

Application context

  • First sentence: You write that requirements defines the stakeholders, users and customers - is it not the other way round ?
    • Fixed - Reworked this section
  • Second sentence: You state the importance of understanding the requirements "completely and unambiguously. That is probably the core of requirements management and requirements "engineering", therefore you should consider elaborating the statement at this point in the article, maybe referring to the section "Req. elicitation" later in the article
    • Fixed - Reworked this section
  • Sentences no. 8 and 9 are difficult to understand, consider rephrasing
    • Fixed - Reworked this section

Acceptance and use

  • In general, this section (and even the header itself) is a bit difficult to understand.
    • Fixed - I have gone over the entire section and reworked it. The headline is also been altered.
  • As mentioned in the general remarks you indicate that "requirements engineering" is a defined discipline or process, but you do not elaborate on or describe it's definition
    • Fixed
  • What is the point of your references to software development issues in the first half of the paragraph?
    • Fixed
  • It is a good idea to give examples like the one of the railway system, but the point is difficult to grasp
    • Fixed

Creating requirements

  • In this section you introduce a definition of "requirements engineering" as a Deming-type circular process. Is that correctly understood by the reader? -If so you should consider using the graphic representation more, elaborating on all 4 steps in the circle as they are named on the diagram. As the article is written now it is difficult to see the connection between the "RE Lifecycle" and the issues you elaborate on in the following sections.
    • Fixed - I’ve tried to elaborate a little more on requirement lifecycle and I tried to explain it better.

Major concepts

You should consider deleting this header, it does not contribute to the reader's overview of the article, as long as you don't show a coherent whole framework for those "concepts"

  • Fixed - I have deleted this headline, you are right is does not really contribute with anything

Requirements elicitation

  • This is an interesting section, apparently introducing learning and skills from the domain of psychology into the world of "engineering". The human factor ! It would be even more interesting if you could elaborate on this "shift of mindset" a bit more, and maybe reflect on how an engineering or project management practitioner can apply these methods in his practice, in particular how to handle the "translation" of the "elicitated requirements" into engineering specifications

Design and validation

  • It becomes a little unclear where we are now in the RE lifecycle?
    • I have made a Requirement Life Cycle section that hopefully has cleared that up. :-)

Context

  • You refer to this item as a "phase", bur for the reader it is very unclear where in your RE lifecycle this phase belongs. The considerations you mention in this section is probably clever and relevant, but the reader is lost at this point.
    • Fixed

Functional requirements

  • Again you refer to this as a "phase in requirements engineering". What phase in what model? I'm afraid many readers would be lost at this point.
    • Fixed - I have made it different, I now refer to it as a method, see requirement life cycle
  • If you believe the snow card is an good example of an applicable method you should consider showing a larger and readable picture, and to explain and elaborate on it. Otherwise don't show it.
    • Fixed - I have made the picture bigger

Non-functional requirements

  • Your definition of non-functional requirements as "qualities" is interesting, you should consider giving some (authoritative?) references to this definition.
  • You should give the source reference for your list of "qualities", it is unclear if the list comes from the ISO standard mentioned - also unlisted in the references.

Requirements management

  • Again you denote this as a "phase" - however this time I believe that we are back on the previously shown RE lifecycle again ?. You should consider explaining to the reader how these "management" (your own denotion) processes you describe here corresponds with the "engineering" processes of your RE lifecycle. Is "Requirement Management" an element or a process within Requirements engineering ?
    • Fixed

Discussion

  • It seems to this reviewer that in this section you just repeat your arguments from the "Background" introduction for particular effort on requirements engineering in project work. Consider instead to make some application advice or reflections on the practices and methods you have described, e.g. describe a link between your "requirements engineering" and project management standard practices.

Review by TigR

General remarks

Language
Some minor things, mainly grammatical; like using "the" in front of customer* and some phrases become "Speech" instead of written text.. see details in specific remarks.
Layout
Be attentive of how your final article looks, use preview to make sure that what you have written is also displayed in that way.. I have found that sometimes an extra "enter" is needed to convince wiki to give me the next line. Also, start your headers from level 2 '==' as level 1 is reserved the title of your page (according to the Help page on formatting)

Specific remarks

Introduction

Grammatical things
"among the involved parties"
  • Fixed
"from a client" => "of a client"
  • Fixed
"goal of the product" can a product have "goals" I've heard of projects with goals.. I may be wrong here.
  • Fixed
"the developers create" developers can be replaced with 'they' and "they creates" is incorrect (it's a good test to do if it sounds off, change to one of the known words I, you, he/she/it, we, You, they :)
  • Fixed - I’ve put in ‘Developers create’, otherwise in my opinion it creates a little confusion on who I’m talking about if I put in ‘They’
"to specific" => "to specify"
  • Fixed
"is suppose" => "is supposed"
  • Fixed
"the basis to get" => "the basis for getting"
  • Fixed
"a iterative" => "an iterative" the usual test for a and an is checking the first letter of the word following it; is it a vowel then it is an
  • Fixed
"reflect a product best possible" not sure exactly what is meant here, but I will guess rearranging it to "reflect the best possible product" gives the correct meaning.
  • Fixed

The introduction is (besides the above stuff) very well written and explanatory.

  • Thanks :-)

Background

due to the header it is difficult to see that the text is an introduction to the following sub-headers..

  • I have also removed it, thanks for noticing

Application context

Grammatical things
"basis for" => "basis of"
  • Fixed
"and that is where" => "and this is where"
  • Fixed
"to understand" => "understanding"
  • Fixed
"the need", "the problem"
  • Fixed
"is done" => "is reached" or "has been established"
  • Fixed
"need of" => "need for"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"be clear defined" => "be clearly defined"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"It is about" <= speech, and what is It in this sentence?
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"creating stable" => "creating a stable"
  • Fixed
"the destination" <= I think "where you might end" sounds a bit better?
  • Fixed
I'd scrap "though" and start at "The intention of the requirements"
  • Fixed
you mix times.. "is" and "would".. use "will"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"management requirements" ? missing a komma? and then "form" without s
  • Fixed
"There exists multiple examples" => "Multiple examples exist"
  • Fixed
"because poorly" => "because of poorly"
  • Fixed
"shows the problems" => "shows that the problems"
  • Fixed
perhaps use ":" to list the three categories?

Perhaps elaborate bit more about the challenge you mention

  • Fixed - I have elaborated a little bit and given an example :-)

Acceptance and use

layout
a big text like this one can be heavy to take in one chunk.. if you insert more "enter" or I guess in english you call them "breaks" or "new line" you can force the text into sections which are easier to read.
  • Fixed
Grammatical things
"requirements engineering"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"dominant force of change of products" <= needs some rephrasing to display the actual meaning clearly.
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"the could cause" => "this could cause a"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"Even though" be careful with starting off sentences like that if they stand alone, "on the other hand" might be what you mean.. or you could just decide to state it as "Requirements engineering can be..".
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"for example" => "for example;"
  • Fixed
again "requirements engineering" be consistent in that one, not mentioning it again.
  • Fixed
"applies" => "also applies"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
try to read the sentence without the insert.. "components which.." consider revision of the last part.
  • Fixed
"There exist several standards" => "Several standards exist"
  • Fixed - The sentence has changed, so I’ve chosen to go with what is says now.
"define." and "where in" => "In"
  • Fixed
"likely the" => "likely that the"
  • Fixed

Interesting and with substance

  • Thank you :-)

Creating requirements

Layout
remember the header issue
  • Fixed - Renamed the header and fixed the issue regarding level of headlines.
Grammatical things
"different ways" <= perhaps add an indicator of ammount? several, many, some.
  • Fixed - I have elaborated a little more on which ways im talking about. So i think it’s not necessary to put an amount on it.
"accordingly" => "according"
  • Fixed
"a system" => "the system" ?
  • Fixed
"supposed"
  • Fixed
"achieve the"
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
"best as possible." => "the best." ?
  • Fixed - Removed words while redoing section
ouch.. missing the s in your text for the picture as well.
  • Fixed
"in this article".... are they? which article.. the one I'm reading or the one you are referring to?
  • Fixed

Major concepts

no intro?

  • Fixed - removed header, didn't really add anything :-)

Requirements elicitation

Layout
Again a very large chunk of text.. try to divide it, perhaps using the same scheme as I do with ";The objective technique:" next line ":The objective technique is..." use the preview function to make it look readable and structured.
Beautiful table. well thought.
  • Thank you
Grammatical things
req-s again.. is the header or text incorrect?
  • Fixed - In this case it would be the text.
"to understanding" => "to understand"
  • Fixed
take out "Though"
  • Fixed
"use full" => "useful"
  • Fixed
"for which the requirements need to fulfill" ? the requirements have to fulfill the surrounding environment?
  • Fixed - Wups, seems like I have made a double sentence there. Nice spottet, thanks!
"called more like a" speech language => "called a"
  • Fixed
"where some like" => "where something like"
  • Fixed
"in to" => "into" (best test.. make the space a deliberate pause when reading)
  • Fixed
"desires"
  • Fixed
"through"
  • Fixed

impressive chapter, very few errors and very understandable.

  • Thanks :-)

Design and validation

Grammatical things
"minded for" => "minded towards"
  • Fixed
"intention" => "intent"
  • Fixed
"phase,"
  • Fixed
"useful to" => "useful for"
  • Fixed
"fulfills the"
  • Fixed

good

Context

Grammatical things
"most reflect" => "mostly reflect"
  • Fixed
"the project has" => "of the project"
  • Fixed
"establishing context"
  • Fixed
"identifying systems or processes"
  • Fixed

only minor stuff

Functional requirements

Grammatical things
"one"
  • Fixed
"meanwhile" => "while"
  • Fixed
"in order to leave out any doubt regarding the goal of the requirement."
  • Fixed
"exits" => "exist"
  • Fixed
"uses cases" => "user cases"?
  • Fixed - It’s actually suppose to say use cases. It is a technical term.
"in the picture below" <= but I see it above or besides the text?

the picture is fairly small if you were to see the idea of it without clicking on it.

  • Fixed

Non-functional requirements

Grammatical things
Whoa.. "Quality means..." that sentence needs some serious rework.. think about what it means as it is written now.
  • Fixed - Redid section, so hopefully it makes more sense now.
"irrespective"? => "regardless"
  • Fixed
"specify a some" ?
  • Fixed
"There exits ISO standards" => "ISO standards exist"
  • Fixed - Sentence has been reworked
"The idea is then" => "The procedure is"
  • Fixed
"system goals"
  • Fixed
"argument of"
  • Fixed
"example on list of" => "example of a list with"
  • Fixed

Perhaps (if possible) move the picture to the right of the text

  • Fixed - I have made the picture bigger and larger in the left side. It's a little hard to control in the right side

Acceptance test

Grammatical things
"engineering disciplines" => "engineering discipline"
  • Fixed
"various ways" & "testing a system"
  • Fixed
"should consists" => "should consist" or "consists"
  • Fixed

Requirements management

Grammatical things
"activates" ? => "activities"?
  • Fixed
"in a more"
  • Fixed
"exist" ok, think of it this way.. exit_, a way out, or more with s.. exist, is present
  • Fixed

Discussion

Grammatical things
"exist"
  • Fixed
if you haven't already, search and replace all "requirement engineering" with "requirements engineering"
  • Fixed
"sizes"
  • Fixed
"computers systems" => "computer systems"
  • Fixed
"systems have" as in they have
  • Fixed
"affect" => "effect" verb vs. noun
  • Fixed
"for everyday" => "for every day"
  • Fixed
"consequences"
  • Fixed
"why today the .... quality" => "why the .... quality today"
  • Fixed
"be emphasize the" => "be emphasized that"
  • Fixed
"solution by" => "solution in"
  • Fixed
"every persons" => "every person"
  • Fixed

Strength and weaknesses

Grammatical things
"as wells" => "as well"
  • Fixed
"Though that the fact .... same" => "The fact .... same though"
  • Fixed
"benefit of using"
  • Fixed
"and generate higher"
  • Fixed
"contributions"
  • Fixed
"Though it is" => "It is"
  • Fixed
"but it is" => "but"
  • Fixed
Retrieved from "http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php?title=Talk:Requirements_engineering&oldid=6503"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox