Hi Cor, On 11/1/06, Cor Nouws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Kohei,
I think it is party right what you write. Because I've some more experience is writing words than code, I don't have that 'problem' and maybe under estimate it.
I have no doubt that expressing and formulating ideas into words is probably fun and rewarding activity for you, just as it is fun and rewarding for me to formulate my ideas into code. This is probably why you're in marketing and I'm not. ;-)
OTOH, there is an idea, and a programmer has to be able to tell /explain what he/she wants to achieve, one way or another. Isn't it?
Yes. Actually it was never my intention to counter this point.
Maybe the problem is, that the description shouldn't include details and all steps, but just the main-lines. For example: this feature offers a dialog/menu, that the user can find there, which gets data from there, and in which the user can do this, and has as result that such, and so, and the data is stored in that place/way.
:-) Yes, I fully agree. This is what I would call a feature description, and I'd be glad to provide one if asked, whether it is for marketing or for documentation. What I think we are discussing (to death) on this thread is the method of communication between developers and QAs, and whether or not the specification is the right medium for that purpose and/or whether the specification process is executed optimally to satisfy all parties (developers vs QA / Sun vs non-Sun / paid vs volunteer / etc.)
Just my thoughts ...
Your thoughts are much appreciated. :-) Kohei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
