Hi Kay et al; On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 08:54 -0800, Kay Schenk wrote: > note to Bill: PLEASE do take a look at the Requirements wiki page that > Maarten mentioned. It could be better organized...I would like to see > more of an outline form personnaly. I took at look over last weekend, > and, well, basically decided I didn't know if I should yank all the > verbiage out and redo it. But we could do this I guess. >
Responded to the Requirements Wiki page, with some very preliminary Home Web page research. I have entered it into the Discussion page there. I found a lot of the stuff and organization on the Requirements Wiki page reassuring. But, I would still like to see more of a project outline that explains the project objectives and (for a lack of a better term) governance. As for yanking the "verbiage", I would recommend not to -- yet. My experience is that the best way to get started -- is to get started. In this case, that means someone throwing their opening thoughts on the "white board" -- so to speak. For a short time let everybody comment, criticize, and suggest. Then take another look; put it in order; rejecting some, keeping some. By then, when that revision is finished, you have got a plan. Who does, or how the "rejecting some, keeping some" happens, is not clear to me. -- Regards Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
