Essence 1.0 FTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

ESSENCE — Inconsistency of definitions for Bounded/Scoped requirements Alpha State.

  • Key: ESSENCE-189
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Issue 176 has a proposed resolution to change the name of the Bounded Requirements alpha state to Scoped.

    However there is still a need to change the definition to better reflect the checklist and the concept of scoping with respect to its making the extent of the system clear.

    We need to have a high level definition which captures the concept of clear extent and purpose.

    the current definition in does not capture the extent concept of scoping or boundedness properly.

    "Bounded: The purpose and theme of the new system are clear."

    Also, if you look at clause 9.8.3 in the examples of the textual notation there is a another definition which is different than the one in the alpha section, but it uses the "extent" concept

    "state Bounded

    {"The theme and extent of the new system is clear"}

    This is adds extent concept but keeps the "theme" concept.

    The concept of "theme" seems too loose for a proper definition.

    Proposed Resolution

    I suggest that we resolve this issue by replacing the definition in and in 9.2.3 for the new
    named state "Scoped" with the following:

    "Scoped: The purpose and extent of the new system are clear"

  • Reported: Essence 1.0b1 — Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:44 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — Essence 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Updated the definition of the Bounded state as suggested (independent of the resolution to Issue 176). (Note, however, that the subclause references given in the issue description are incorrect. They should be and 9.8.3.)

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT