On Nov 12, 2007 7:12 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 12, 2007 9:03 PM, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 11/12/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 12, 2007 8:09 PM, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The difference is that the story is an authoritative > > > > spec of how the system should behave, and the description has no > > > > authority at all. > > > > > > I don't have that sense at all. Where do you get that from? > > > > >From the belief that the customer is the ultimate authority on what it > > means for the system to behave acceptably, and the fact that stories > > are customer-facing and specs are developer-facing. > > I totally agree that the customer is the authority - however, the > customer has just as much right to change her mind about a story as I > do about a spec! So why should stories be any more locked down than > specs?
Stories represent a bridge between the customer's and the developer's minds, a snapshot of the shared understanding at a given point in time. They do not obviate the need for customer-developer communication. A customer should be able to change her stories as much as she wants, but all but the very simplest changes ought to spur a discussion and reevaluation of assumptions. Pat _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
