|
|
| Syntactic Confectionery Delight | |
| PerlMonks |
Re: Re: Re: A Cautionary Rantby voyager (Friar) |
| on Apr 11, 2001 at 19:21 UTC ( [id://71820]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
This is an archived low-energy page for bots and other anonmyous visitors. Please sign up if you are a human and want to interact.
michael you are correct. There is as big a problem on the development side, but I was responding to the poster who appeared to have his act together.
In fact I hold developers more responsible for not holding up their end of the bargain because we are supposed to be more logical thinkers, etc. I read a recent article that questioned the actual success of eXtreme Programming (XP), but one of its fundamental concepts is that end-users are a core part of the team, constantly interacting with the developers and the application as it is being built. UML (nor any other documentation/specification scheme) simply can not describe an unbuilt application to the degree that a blueprint can describe an unbuilt building. I believe the biggest barrier to successful software is users unable/unwilling to spend sufficient time with developers through the life of the project (this is of course moot if the developer can't/won't interact with the end-user frequently and in jargon-free language).
In Section
Meditations
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||