> Steve wrote: > > Sure you can say anything you want. Just try and word it in > the form of "this is what we want" instead of "this is how > we'll do it" Yes, that makes sense. But I think Erki's question is about the what rather than the how. > Do you see the difference? > > A good game to play is to pretend it's all magical. like "The > information is saved" where? how? when? is it fast enough? > All of those questions wouldn't matter if it was magical. > > We can worry about reality later. When exactly is later? I thought the purpose of the prototype was to "creep the scope" up front?
> Programmers often want to offer numerous edge cases > like "what if X happens or what if Y happens?" They say > "I'm just being a devil's advocate". Reality doesn't need > a devil's advocate, because it can't be ignored. So don't > worry about how you're going to make it all work, just > figure out what the client is looking for. Erki is talking about what the client is looking for. The client wants some functionality that's hard to express in the prototype. We're not just talking about "edge cases." For example, the app I'm working on now has eight fuseactions and only two very simple screens. How do you answer questions like "Which employees show up in that drop-down?" and "Who gets an email notification when that happens?" and "When they come back to that form later will they have to fill it out again or will it retain their information?" How do you capture all of that information with the prototype? Or do we only get those sort of questions in the arctic? Patrick ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
