Author Topic: Requirement priority  (Read 5641 times)

skiwi

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • Karma: +42/-82
    • View Profile
Requirement priority
« on: May 05, 2020, 01:20:36 pm »
We use RFC RFC 2119 keywords to set requirement levels.
In EA the priority field has some predefined values.
I know this have been canvassed way back in the day from a search I did,
but is it possible to specify a project or model default that is different from the predefined values?

tia
Orthogonality rules
Using EA15.2 (1555) on Windows 10 Enterprise/64 bit. Repositories in SQLServer2019 & Access2003/JET4.0. WebEA on Pro Cloud Server 4.2.64

Eve

  • EA Administrator
  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 7537
  • Karma: +94/-17
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2020, 01:48:30 pm »
Configure > Reference Data > Model Types > General Types > Priority.
Eve

support@sparxsystems.com

skiwi

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • Karma: +42/-82
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2020, 02:35:38 pm »
Oh spendid, thankyou very much
Orthogonality rules
Using EA15.2 (1555) on Windows 10 Enterprise/64 bit. Repositories in SQLServer2019 & Access2003/JET4.0. WebEA on Pro Cloud Server 4.2.64

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 12265
  • Karma: +346/-285
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2020, 03:45:51 pm »
Did you think about creating your own requirement element? Adding useful stuff to tags. Along with MOSCOW (or whatever you prefer).

q.

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 7923
  • Karma: +205/-127
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2020, 04:53:11 pm »
Did you think about creating your own requirement element? Adding useful stuff to tags. Along with MOSCOW (or whatever you prefer).

q.
That's what we did...

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Sunshine

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1094
  • Karma: +101/-9
  • Its the results that count
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2020, 03:30:19 pm »
Didn't even know that RFC 2119 existed. Published back in March 1997.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
Is there nothing more recent?
Happy to help
:)

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 7923
  • Karma: +205/-127
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2020, 06:16:36 pm »
Didn't even know that RFC 2119 existed. Published back in March 1997.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
Is there nothing more recent?
Well, we "old-timers" were around then...  ;)

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Uffe

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1859
  • Karma: +132/-14
  • Flutes: 1; Clarinets: 1; Saxes: 5 and counting
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2020, 06:18:13 pm »
Didn't even know that RFC 2119 existed. Published back in March 1997.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
Is there nothing more recent?
Well, there's https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8174.

 ;D
My theories are always correct, just apply them to the right reality.

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 12265
  • Karma: +346/-285
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2020, 06:37:55 pm »
Or basically you can stick to Wittgenstein's  Tractatus logico-philosophicus.

q.

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 7923
  • Karma: +205/-127
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2020, 11:55:53 pm »
Or basically you can stick to Wittgenstein's  Tractatus logico-philosophicus.

q.
I manage to get some way in, but I had to give up.  TOO dense...

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Uffe

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1859
  • Karma: +132/-14
  • Flutes: 1; Clarinets: 1; Saxes: 5 and counting
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2020, 12:04:57 am »
The book, or.....?  ;D
My theories are always correct, just apply them to the right reality.

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 12265
  • Karma: +346/-285
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2020, 12:31:12 am »
The reason why we're using UML is because words don't match their semantics. But what I see is that UML models are also not much better in making a connection. UML is just another language. But somehow we must feed all the lawyers being involved with requirements management.

q.

skiwi

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • Karma: +42/-82
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2020, 06:17:42 am »
Orthogonality rules
Using EA15.2 (1555) on Windows 10 Enterprise/64 bit. Repositories in SQLServer2019 & Access2003/JET4.0. WebEA on Pro Cloud Server 4.2.64

skiwi

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • Karma: +42/-82
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2020, 06:19:47 am »
Didn't even know that RFC 2119 existed. Published back in March 1997.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
Is there nothing more recent?

Does their need to be?
The fact that this is well defined, widely used, makes it a better fit than some sort of MOSCOW varient, or an organisation specific 1 2 3 4, or low med hi IMHO
Orthogonality rules
Using EA15.2 (1555) on Windows 10 Enterprise/64 bit. Repositories in SQLServer2019 & Access2003/JET4.0. WebEA on Pro Cloud Server 4.2.64

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 7923
  • Karma: +205/-127
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement priority
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2020, 08:22:35 am »
Didn't even know that RFC 2119 existed. Published back in March 1997.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
Is there nothing more recent?
Well, there's https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8174.

 ;D

and https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6919 (lol)
RFC6919 is very cute.

But on a more thoughtful note, and somewhat related to RFC6919 is the notion of the evolution of Desired to Actual requirements.  It seems to me that what is ALWAYS missing is...  "This is the desired set of requirements we went to RFP with" and "This is the actual set of requirements we used to finally select the successful proposal."  There is always a (usually undocumented) change in the requirements from commencement to the termination.  Understanding THAT process (and documenting WHY) is crucial, in my view.

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!