RE: The case for use cases

Subject: RE: The case for use cases
From: "Giordano, Connie" <Connie -dot- Giordano -at- FMR -dot- COM>
To: "'Michael West'" <mbwest -at- bigpond -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:14:38 -0400

Michael,

Looks like new semantics for an old process. In my early days we called it
"business process analysis" and was used when designing requirements docs
for apps that automated and reengineered a business' processes.

I guess the names have been changed to protect the innocent. In any event,
this kind of analysis is critical, and the sites you provided are a good
place to start. Thanks.



-----Original Message-----
From: Michael West [mailto:mbwest -at- bigpond -dot- com]
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 8:51 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: The case for use cases



[snip]

I'm an old warhorse in the user doc racket, and I'd never
heard of use cases until fairly recently. Here's what I think
of them.

Done properly, they're the best thing since canned beer.

[snip]
And here's what it gives me --stuff that in the past I
have had to BEG for and, even then, seldom received:

1. Who are the users?
2. What to they put into the system, and when?
3. What do they get back?

Tech writers!! Do you realize how great this is?

If you have a properly executed use case document.
you can blueprint the entire user doc suite before the
first line of code is written. Think about it.

[snip]




Previous by Author: SUMMARY: Installation - separate book in documentation suite?
Next by Author: RE: Just do it
Previous by Thread: RE: The case for use cases
Next by Thread: Editing


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads