On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:19:14PM +0000, Smylers wrote: > > Similarly an author doesn't need to understand all of the problems, just > so long as they state exactly what they are looking at, preferably > stated upfront. So the article starts by saying "I'm looking for a > something that does ..., and these are the features that I'd like it to > have ..., and this is the way it'd be convenient for it to operate".
"Conveniently, I've written exactly the thing that provides the features I need, in a way that's most convenient for my purpose. Everything else pales by comparison, otherwise I would not have written it. Here, let me show you." > Starting with an explicit list of 'requirements' like that has several > advantages: > > * It makes the subsequent review more objective (and, just as > importantly, makes it be seen to be objective), as modules are being > compared against defined criteria rather than just on feelings. It's easy to tailor criteria to suit one module over others. A reader looking for guidance in the ocean of CPAN modules might not even notice that the six modules under review consist of the author's, five poor performers, and conveniently omit four modules that work better. The reader most susceptible to this form of sleight of hand is the one who needs objective reviews the most. > * It means that if a reader with a similar problem thinks that a > criterion listed isn't important -- or has extra criteria which are > -- then he/she can bare that in mind when reading the review, and > still get value from it. > > * Others can use those requirements to review further modules. > > * Somebody could later add another requirement and only has to check > out each of the modules for that to augment the review: it isn't > necessary to start from scratch. I think your last two points are the most important. Peer review and incremental improvement make the review process somewhat collaborative and self-correcting. It should eventually ensure a set of reviews that are fair and comprehensive. Or at least engender some interesting arguments. -- Rocco Caputo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://poe.perl.org/
