[RFC] SRS Section 3

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Feb 9 11:10:19 PST 2005

James Robertson wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> Well, to be honest, I was going to create an entirely separate 
>> document, though still docbook based, to hold this kind of stuff.  
>> Call it a HLD (High-Level Design) or whatever, I couldn't care less to 
>> be honest, but it a) needs to be documented and b) shouldn't be in the 
>> SRS.  Just a warning - HLDs are the lowest level of documentation I'll 
>> contribute to :)  If properly done, the code should then be easily 
>> readable in relation to where abouts it fits into the big picture and 
>> the kind of logic it is utilising to get its job done.  All IMHO of 
>> course.
> OK, that is fine.  I have already committed to doing all the other docs. 
>  If you want a separate doc for the high/low level design that is fine.
> One major thing I want to see in the HLD (if that is what we want to 
> call it) is use cases especially on the client side.

Agreed - do you have a particular tool (OSS of course) you use to create 
the diagrams, or will any old thing like sodipodi do?  Note if we are 
putting images in the book they'll have to be .png or .svg to fit in our 
current toolchain.  Or were you thinking of just putting textual 
descriptions of the use cases in?

> Each UC should 
> have a BZ entry for it to track progress.

Sounds sensible.

> The IBM 
> Rational Unified Process calls the low level design documents different 
> things, use cases mostly.

IBM call UC's *low* level design?  From my experience they've been about 
has high-level as you can get, but then my experience is very limited 
when it comes to use cases.



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list