Requirements Document Comments

Team: DNA

Grade: (91 out of 100) Grade: (95 out of 100)

The following is a breakdown of the grading.

Document presentation (5 out of 5)

Important points:

Organization: OK
Document author: OK
use of English:

Comments:

Project Description of Target System (10 out of 10)

Comments:

Scenario descriptions (10 out of 10)

3 scenarios provided: yes
level of description: maybe a little too involved for Scenario #2. Someone obviously enjoys doing this kind of work. I noticed the not-so-subtle attempt at brown-nosing. :)
clarity: well written

Comments:

Storyboarding (9 out of 10)

Evidence of storyboarding: Yes, well done!
Connection with scenarios: Could be improved a bit, because it's not really clear that you have thought about all of the possibilities from your scenarios and discarded some features (extracting a picture and saving it elsewhere, for example) or just forgot about them when you were storyboarding.

Comments

Functional Requirements (21 out of 25)

Revision (25 out of 25)

Number of requirements: OK
Clarity of description: OK
Decomposition: OK, but I would relabel the "User Interface" section to something more like "User preferences selection". User interface seems to generic and doesn't address the function of preferences setting and management.
Prioritization: yes

Comments: Focus on the what, not how. For example, you don't need to mention that a CGI script is used to store preferences. What's important is that there is persistent storage of preferences to assist the learning algorithm. Not important in this document to say how that will be accomplished. Revision: Done.

Non-Functional Requirements (11 out of 15)

Revision (13 out of 15)

Clarity: OK, but I think the usability issue can be expanded into two separate issues. One has to do with limiting choices and the other with training. The security requirement is unclear. Revision: Does having three choices make it easier to user? Are you going to test that?
Measurability: Don't know how you would measure security as stated.
Variety: OK

Comments:

Platform and Network Environment (10 out of 10)

Target platform described: OK
Development platform described: OK

Comments:

Risk Analysis (15 out of 15)

Risks identified: OK
Alternate strategies identified: OK

Comments:

If you wish to have your Requirements Document regraded, revise it within one week of receiving comments. Be sure to maintain a link to the original version of the Requirements Document in your notebook for comparison purposes. No regrading will occur if your revised document does not contain a proper revision history section which details the changes from earlier versions.