That and Kent s point of having one type of thing to manage. David Roberts InnovaSystems Intl (619) 955-5864 ________________________________ From:Message 1 of 3 , Jun 9, 2005View Source
That and Kent’s point of having one type of thing to manage.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Lasse Koskela
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] User Stories for non-functional requirements
On 6/9/05, David Roberts <droberts@...> wrote:
> I may be oversimplifying this but could non-functional requirements be
> written with the system as the actor?
> What I found with this is that the non-functional requirements above had a
> goal too. Notice there is a reason for the non-functional requirements. Thus
> written as it is originally, misses the intent of the requirement.
> Imagine this difference:
> The color red shall not be used on the website.
> As a System
> I never want to display the color red
> So that I don't offend the customer who believe red is evil
> Any comments?
Makes sense. Kind of. I'm curious as to what do you see as being the
benefit of expressing the non-functional requirements in this format?
The main benefit I see is the rationale behind those requirements is
integrated. Is there something else?
To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...