This is about an interesting article I came across in the ‘Inside Architecture’ blog from Microsoft. Here the author talks about how we tend to classify requirements under category called ‘All-Other’ especially for Non-Functional requirements and goes on to explain why one need’s to avoid using the ‘All-Other’ taxonomy and gives his view and suggestions.
Some interesting excerpts:
“If you create a type called “All-Other,” that tells me that you don’t really know enough about your domain, and you don’t know why you have things in your domain that you cannot classify, but you do, so you create a category for “everything I cannot classify” and throw all elements in. “
“Over the years, software development has matured to the point where we have categories for most requirements, and they are well understood, so the stuff that falls into the “non-functional requirements” category is very constrained. We have a coherent set because we have identified all of the elements that don’t belong there. Yet the name remains.”
A very interesting read.
Read the full article here: http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik/archive/2008/10/13/non-functional-requirements-the-all-other-classification.aspx
So how do you classify your customer’s requirements?