Re: [epf-dev] supporting requirements

[Corey Segall <coreysegall@xxxxxxxxx>]

    I would agree that there are certain projects that creating use cases would not make sense.
But use cases are a great method in a lot of situtations. Use cases also of course help with other
down stream work products like estimating (function points counts for example) as well as test
case development and so on.

Corey Segall



--- Ronaldo r <ronaldorezende@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So,
> do you create use cases for all possible situations? Even for those that
> hasn't much interations between user and the system?
> 
> Suppose that my system has 300 entitys that need to be manteined by the
> user. In this case you will write 300 use cases like "mantain entity x",
> grouping insert, delete and updating operations ?
> 
> On 6/19/07, Jim Ruehlin <jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ronaldo,
> >
> >
> >
> > Use cases describe functional requirements that are usually NOT
> > system-wide. The requirements described in use cases are specific to a
> > goal the user is trying to achieve. So if you have functional
> > requirements that apply at all times to the entire system, you would
> > place them in the Supporting Requirements artifact.
> >
> >
> >
> > In my experience, system-wide functional requirements are rare. You'll
> > almost always put functional requirements in use cases.
> >
> >
> >
> > As I wrote in a previous post, business rules describe what the business
> > can or can't do, such as the circumstances under which a mortgage
> > application can be accepted.
> >
> >
> >
> > So you might have a use case called "Request Mortgage Loan", where the
> > system allows someone to submit their mortgage application and check the
> > status of the loan approval. In the step of the use case that describes
> > the functional requirement of submitting the application data, you might
> > reference the business rule (in the Supplementary Specification) that
> > describes what data must be included in the application before it can be
> > accepted by the system.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> >
> > - Jim
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________
> >
> > Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational
> >
> > RUP Content Developer
> >
> > Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer www.eclipse.org/epf
> >
> > email:   jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > phone:  760.505.3232
> >
> > fax:      949.369.0720
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of "Ronaldo r" <ronaldorezende@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 8:14 AM
> > To: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [epf-dev] supporting requirements
> >
> >
> >
> > I've saw this in supporting requirements template. I haven't
> > understand this yet. I'm confusing about what kind of requirements
> > should be in a use case, the requirements that fits better in "System
> > wide functional requirements" or "Business rule" sections of
> > supporting requirements template.
> >
> >
> > On 6/19/07, Nate Oster < noster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Ronaldo,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure where in OpenUP you're referencing, but I think the
> > > distinction is SCOPE. "System wide Functional Requirements" are
> > > *global* - they apply to the entire system. The entire system must
> > > behave a certain way.
> > >
> > > "Business Rules" might be associated with only part of the system. For
> > > example, there may be many business rules about a Register Member use
> > > case, but contradictory business rules for the Manage Member Profiles
> > > use case. There could be any number of reasons for this, such as
> > > different actors (perhaps one is an end user, the other a customer
> > > support engineer).
> > >
> > > Is there somewhere that this is too ambiguous in OpenUP? We can always
> > > submit a bug! :)
> > >
> > > Nate
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Ronaldo r
> > > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:30 PM
> > > To: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
> > > Subject: [epf-dev] supporting requirements
> > >
> > > What's the difference of "System wide Functional Requirements" section
> > > and "Business Rules"? What kind of rule fit in each of these?
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > epf-dev mailing list
> > > epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > epf-dev mailing list
> > epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > epf-dev mailing list
> > epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> epf-dev mailing list
> epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search 
that gives answers, not web links. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC