一个好的“规格”是如何实现的？与不清楚的“祈祷？”不同。
我相信每个人都知道5Ws，这是一个获取“完整”故事的公式用于新闻业。
是否有这样的公式 - 我的意思是，例如应该回答问题 - 这样“规范”就可以被认为是完全完整的。
因为有时我面临的一些功能的规范听起来更像是“祈祷”而不是规范。 - 好吧，也许这就是有些祈祷无法实现的原因；规格对大神来说还不够清楚。
那么，是什么让“规格”变得完美呢？对此是否存在共识？
谢谢， 布拉克·奥斯多安
I am sure everybody knows the 5Ws, a formula for getting the "full" story on something which is used in journalism.
Is there a formula like this -I mean, like that questions should be answered for example- so that a "spec" can be considered as totally complete.
Because sometimes I face some features with a spec that sounds like a "pray" more than a specification. -Well, maybe that is even the reason some prays do not come real; specs are not clear enough for the God.
So, what makes a "spec" perfect? Any consensus on this exist?
Thanks,
burak ozdogan
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（5）
唯一完美的规范是工作、运行的代码。其他任何东西都只是一个近似值。
The only perfect specification is working, running code. Anything else is just an approximation.
清晰、共享的概念和术语起着至关重要的作用。
关于术语，每个人都需要了解规范中词语的含义。如果您的措辞不一致或使用了规范受众无法识别的措辞，那么就有失败的风险。
但这还不是全部。即使有完美的术语，您也需要对词语背后的概念达成清晰且一致的共识。如果不同的利益相关者以不同的方式“分割”现实，或者换句话说，当他们环顾四周时没有看到相同的东西，而你的规范无法解决这个问题，那么你也面临着风险。
Clear, shared concepts and terminology play a crucial role.
Regarding terminology, everybody needs to understand what words mean in the spec. If you are inconsistent with words or use words that the spec's audience will not recognise, then there is a risk of failure.
But that's not all. Even with perfect terminology, you need to have a clear and shared agreement on the concepts underlying the words. If differen stakeholders "cut up" reality in different ways, or, in other words, don't see the same things when they look around, and your spec fails to address this, then you are at risk too.
规范永远不会是完美的。如果规范能够让每个人都满意地回答谁、什么和何时的问题，那么它就是好的。
谁与系统交互？
系统需要做什么？
系统什么时候需要做什么？
A specification will never be perfect. A specification will be good if it answers the who, what, and when questions to everyone's satisfaction.
Who interfaces with the system?
What does the system need to do?
When does the system need to do what?
同行评审也有很长的路要走。一旦让所有利益相关者（包括管理层）就该规范达成一致，您就可以确信它正朝着正确的方向发展。
Peer review also goes a long way. Once you get all stakeholders - including management - to agree on the spec, you can be confident that it is headed in the right direction.
为了完整，必须考虑功能性和非功能性（又名能力）要求。
一个可以提供帮助的系统是 FURPS（或 FURPS+）。
FURPS+ 中的“+”表示以下关注点：
Both functional and non-functional (aka ilities) requirements have to be considered in order to be complete.
One system that could help is FURPS (or FURPS+).
The "+" in FURPS+ to remember concerns such as: