Level 3: Introduction is clear, concise and thorough. All
important parts of the requirements described.
Level 2: Introduction is clear and concise but some important
parts of the requirements not mentioned.
Level 1: Introduction is hard to comprehend or very incomplete.
Scenarios
Level 3: Scenarios are narrative and describe use of the system
in the context of realistic restaurant use. All use cases are covered.
Level 2: Scenarios are narrative and describe use of the system
in the context of realistic restaurant use. Some use cases are covered.
Level 1: Scenarios are not narrative, or do not describe the
use of the system in a realistic context, or do not cover most important
use cases.
Use Cases
Minimum set of use cases:
-- customer makes reservation on phone, internet or as walk-in
-- restaurant staff seats customer with reservation
-- restaurant staff seats customer without reservation
-- patrons leave or "table becomes available"
-- reservation is canceled
-- reservation is changed
-- reservation is viewed or checked
-- some discussion of putting people and taking them off a waiting list
(will often be merged with other use cases, I think)
-- enter restaurant layout and wait-staff info into system.
List of Use Cases
Level 4: List of Use Cases is complete.
Level 3: List of Use Cases is missing 1 or 2 important
cases.
Level 2: List of Use Cases is missing 3 or 4 important
cases.
Level 1: List of Use Cases is missing 4+ important cases.
Quality of Use Cases
Level 4: Each Use Case is well-written, with extensions and variations fully explored.
Level 3: Most Use Cases are well-written, but some are incomplete.
Level 2: Many Use Cases are incomplete or improperly done. For example, perhaps the wrong information is
listed under the headings.
Level 1: Use Cases are incomprehensible.
Non-functional requirements.
Level 3: Description of Non-functional requirements is
thorough, clear and concise.
Level 2: Description of Non-functional requirements is clear
and concise but incomplete.
Level 1: Description of Non-functional requirements contains
things that are not non-functional requirements or is incomprehensible.
Subsets
Level 4: Subsets are all useful and the list includes all
possible useful subsets of functionality. Subsets are written in a
clear, concise and thorough way.
Level 3: Subsets are mostly if not all useful (1 or 2 of the
minimal ones may be a little too minimal). Subsets are written in a
clear, concise and thorough way. The list is at least mostly complete.
Level 2: Subsets are mostly or all useful but the list of
subsets is incomplete. Very good candidates for subsets are not
included.
Level 1: Subsets do not contain useful functionality, or the
description of the subsets is incomprehensible.
Glossary
Level 3: Glossary is thorough and explains the restaurant
domain well. It also may describe some technical terms.
Level 2: Glossary explains some words from the restaurant
domain well, but is missing some words that were used in the document.
Level 1: Glossary is incomplete or is missing very important
words about the domain (e.g, "reservation").
Presentation and Appearance
Level 4: The Requirements Document looks professionally done.
The document uses hyper links effectively to reduce duplication as well
as guide the reader as he/she reads the document. It's very easy
to get both a high-level view of the requirements and also to drill into
the details. There is nothing distracting about the format or layout.
Level 3: The Requirements Document looks professionally done.
Hyper links are used but not as much as they could be. It's It's very
easy to get both a high-level view of the requirements and also to drill
into the details. There is nothing distracting about the format or
layout.
Level 2: The Requirements Document looks nice but it is not
easy to just get a high-level view of the requirements from the
document. There is nothing distracting about the format or layout.
Level 1: The Requirements Document has a distracting format or
layout. The web site is confusing to navigate.
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Washington
Box 352350
Seattle, WA 98195-2350
(206) 543-1695 voice, (206) 543-2969 FAX
[comments to vibha]