Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!princeton!udel!rochester!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!tetra!embick
From: embick@tetra.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Structured Analysis ques.
Summary: Putting the cart before the horse
Message-ID: <689@tetra.NOSC.MIL>
Date: 9 Jun 88 15:46:53 GMT
References: <4150003@hpcilzb.HP.COM> <2449@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> <3668@bunker.UUCP>
Reply-To: embick@tetra.nosc.mil.UUCP (Edward M. Embick)
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Lines: 19

In article <3668@bunker.UUCP> rha@bunker.UUCP (Robert H. Averack) writes:
>In article <2449@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> hsd@uvacs.cs.virginia.edu.UUCP (Harry S. Delugach) writes:
>
>>One doesn't have to separate the two phases (requirements and design)
>
>one needs to know WHAT a system is supposed to do BEFORE it is possible to
>determine HOW to do it...

Unfortunately, many developers seem to latch onto a harware/software
capability that provides a "unique approach" to accomplishing an application,
and build a system around it without regard to the using community's
needs.  "Gee, that's a neat idea!  What kind of package can we wrap it
in so we can sell it?"  The design then dictates the requirements ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Embick (If God wanted me to write legibly, He wouldn't have invented email)
Computer Sciences Corp.
4045 Hancock St.                   MILNET:  embick@tetra.nosc.mil 
San Diego, CA 92110              
(619) 225-8401 x287