Rey Muradaz wrote: > > Yes, but that info would be pretty helpful if you're trying to add on another floor, >don't you think? (BTW, I hope you're not saying that all of your development >projects end up in a heap of wreckage . . . :). >
Maybe, maybe not. I've tried this two ways and they both seem to work about the same, but for different reasons. I've tried one way where I make changes to the prototype, then use the existing fusedoc to modify the new one. I've also tried, making changes to the prototype, scraping the old fusedoc and refusedocing the changed pages in the new prototype. I guess it has to do with how much you're changing in each fuse. If you're changing a lot, that old blueprint will just slow you down. Here's an analogy. My mother has been a home renovation architect for 30 years. If the house she's working on will be ripping off the roof to put on another floor, having the blueprints for that roof won't do her any good. She just needs measurements to create the new blueprints. The NEW blueprints get submitted to the engieers for structural review and the builders to build the new floor, not the old ones. > Documenting up front is the best, but documentation at *any* point in the process is >still useful when you have to pick up someone else's work weeks, months or (yikes!) >years later. I'd say it fully depends on the type of documentation you get. Stupid documentation does you nothing regardless of when it's written, like this: <!--- loop over query ---> <cfloop query="somequery"> or <!--- setting first_name variable ---> <cfset first_name="Steve"> That just won't do you any good. Now Fusedocs documentation at any point in the process... it might help it might not. I'd still start with the wireframe, go to the prototype, fusedoc, fusecode and unit test, regardless of how much was already built and working. If *some* of the fusedocs were already written, then great, it helped. If you added new stuff, new fusedocs would need to be written. btw, as far as wreckages go. Sure, i've had my share of wreckages, and my share of successes. My biggest flop crashed 2 weeks before we were going to sign a contract for $26,000,000 (that's a lot of zeros!!). That was the day I began to really take Fusebox seriously. Steve Nelson > > REM O- > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/23/02 12:36PM >>> > Is it? Knowing how much weight a steel beam can hold seems pretty pointless to > me.... if the building has already collapsed. > > Steve Nelson > > "Benjamin S. Rogers" wrote: > > > > > Steve is right; documenting post-development is pointless; > > > Fusedocing up front is powerful. > > > > Pointless? That's a bit extreme, isn't it? > > > > Benjamin S. Rogers > > http://www.c4.net/ > > v.508.240.0051 > > f.508.240.0057 > > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
