[trustable-software] Exploring the "Hypothesis for software to be trustable"

trustable at panic.fluff.org trustable at panic.fluff.org
Wed Jan 3 09:31:45 GMT 2018


Andrew,
     I'm interested to see in inclusion of 'Concise' within this list. How 
do you imagine we can measure 'Concise' ? Is this a measure of the number 
of words taken to describe behaviour ? or is this some UML markup or 
something else ?

   Thanks
  Edmund
  On Wed, 3 Jan 2018, Andrew Banks wrote:

> Morning Paul (and the group)... and HNY to you all

Far be it for me to challenge the combined wisdom of Wikipedia, for measures for requirements specification I usually consider (as a minimum) the six Cs.
 	Clear, Concise, Correct, Coherent, Complete and Confirmable.

Your list covers four of these... so I would suggest the additional inclusion of Concise and Correct

 	# t.requirements (derived from wikipedia [2])
 	   - t.requirements MUST be unitary
 	   - t.requirements MUST be atomic (non-conjugated)
 	   - t.requirements MUST be complete				C5 - Complete
 	   - t.requirements MUST be consistent				C4 - Coherent
 	   - t.requirements MUST be traceable
 	   - t.requirements MUST be current
 	   - t.requirements MUST be unambiguous			C1 - Clear?
 	   - t.requirements MUST be verifiable				C6 - Confirmable
 	   - t.requirements MAY be graded by priority/importance

Kind regards
Andrew


_______________________________________________
trustable-software mailing list
trustable-software at lists.trustable.io
https://lists.trustable.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/trustable-software




More information about the trustable-software mailing list