Re: Lack of Written Specifications

>> verbal (adj) ... 2) oral, not written oed in full here - *see 4a* (being an adjective its meaning is defined in the context of its related noun) http://tinyurl.com/3c2nu2 Andrew Davies  MBCS CITP   - AndyD    8-)# **

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

On Mar 1, 2007, at 3:30 AM, Andy Davies wrote: >> Written docs *are* verbal. I believe you mean 'oral'. - Ed > > verbal (adj) ... 2) oral, not written oed http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20010626 http://www.usaclals.org/?q=node/49 http://www.bartleby.com/68/36/6336.html http:

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

Andy Davies wrote: >> Written docs *are* verbal. I believe you mean 'oral'. - Ed >> > > verbal (adj) ... 2) oral, not written oed > Yeah - Ed's just a wannabe nitpicker, not a true pedant ! > Andrew Davies MBCS CITP > - AndyD8-)# > > >

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

Stephen the Cook wrote: > Ed Leafe <> wrote: > >> On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: >> >> >>> Often times work is performed where there is no documentation or >>> written specifications and authorizations to do the work are verbal. >>> >> Written docs *are* verba

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

>Written docs *are* verbal. I believe you mean 'oral'. - Ed verbal (adj) ... 2) oral, not written oed Andrew Davies  MBCS CITP   - AndyD    8-)# ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and inte

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Stephen the Cook > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 4:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Lack of Written Specifications > > Ed Leafe <> wrote: > > On Feb

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

Jeff Johnson <> wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> On Behalf Of Bill Arnold >> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:22 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: Lack of Written Spe

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

Ed Leafe <> wrote: > On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: > >> Often times work is performed where there is no documentation or >> written specifications and authorizations to do the work are verbal. > > Written docs *are* verbal. I believe you mean 'oral'. > > Just chec

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Bill Arnold > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 2:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Lack of Written Specifications > > > Jeff, I'm coming from the point o

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

Jeff, I'm coming from the point of view of someone who works with one monitor for developing doc and the other for developing software. Maybe you do that also, so we're saying the same thing, only differing on what the doc is called? Bill > > Jeff, how about including something like: > > >

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Bill Arnold > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Lack of Written Specifications > > > Jeff, how about including something

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

Jeff, how about including something like: "concurrent with ongoing product support, a separate task will be assigned to develop written specifications based on the existing application and requirements for future development", and maybe show an example of specs prepared for another project to se

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of John Baird > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:24 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Lack of Written Specifications > > The wording sounds good to me with the exce

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

The wording sounds good to me with the exception of "agreed upon by both parties". What happens when they can't agree? You may wish to consider some kind of arbitration. -Original Message- From: "Jeff Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: profox@leafe.com Sent: 2/28/07 11:26 Subject: Lack o

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> > I would say that the functionality provided by the mutually agreed-upon > version of the app is to be used as the baseline for future > modifications. I would also say that there is no such thing as a bug-fix > since a bug is defined (I think this is in DevGuide somewhere) as an > operation th

RE: Lack of Written Specifications

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Ed Leafe > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:29 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Lack of Written Specifications > > On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote:

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

Jeff Johnson wrote: > I am putting together a support agreement with another software company. I > am going to maintain their application for their customers (I have been > doing work on the application as a contractor). There are no written > specifications for the application so I figured the s

Re: Lack of Written Specifications

On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: > Often times work is performed where there is no documentation or > written > specifications and authorizations to do the work are verbal. Written docs *are* verbal. I believe you mean 'oral'. Just checking in from the nitpicki