| How to Write Complete, Minimal, and Extensible Content? [message #567656] |
Tue, 07 November 2006 20:23 |
 Jim Ruehlin
Messages: 73
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
An important issue that's getting revealed in recent reviews of
OpenUP/Basic is how should content (primarily tasks) be written when
writing core content for OpenUP. OpenUP/Basic is minimal, complete, and
extensible. We want content that can be used out-of-the-box, but can
also be extended to other environments such as large teams. How should
tasks be written to accommodate this?
One thought is that we write OpenUP/Basic strictly for small projects
and exclude information on large projects. This idea is applied in the
current top-to-bottom review of OpenUP - see Bugzilla for details.
Content for different teams (large, distributed, low collaboration, etc)
would need to either contribute to or replace the existing content. The
problem with this is that extending the content may be more difficult
because some content would likely need to be replaced rather than just
contributed to.
Another thought is that we should write content that's easily
extendable. New content would be additive without the need to replace.
This might involve including statements about project characteristics
outside of the definition of OpenUP/Basic, or writing the text generic
enough that it can be extended via contribution. Little or no text would
need to be replaced. Problems with this approach may be that the content
is more difficult to read, and may provide less specific value to the
small teams targeted in OpenUP/Basic. Perhaps the process won't be as
"crisp". It may also be more difficult to write content that's specific
enough to be valuable but general enough to be extended without
replacing text.
What do others think? Is there a preference, or an alternative solution?
Jim Ruehlin
jruehlin@us.ibm.com
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03547 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
