Both - so it's great!
Thx,
Antoine
On 9/17/14 11:44 AM, Bosch, Thomas wrote:
> Hi Antoine,
>
> do you mean the order when you edit requirements or when you view specific requirements or both?
> I changed it now for both.
>
>
> Best,
> Thomas
>
> --
> Thomas Bosch, M.Sc. (TUM)
> PhD student
> GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
> Social Science Metadata Standards
> Visitors Address: B2,1, D-68159 Mannheim
> Postal Address: P.O.Box 12 21 55, D-68072 Mannheim
> Tel: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-271
> Fax: + 49 (0) 621 / 1246-100
> Web: http://www.gesis.org
> Website: http://boschthomas.blogspot.com/
> GitHub: https://github.com/boschthomas/PhD
>
>
> --------Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> ---Von: DCMI Architecture Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> ---Im Auftrag von Antoine Isaac
> ---Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. September 2014 22:09
> ---An: [log in to unmask]
> ---Betreff: Re: AW: [RDF AP] Suggested change in interface for requirement DB
> ---
> ---Thanks for the change!
> ---Re. the order, I'd put the classification at the end, like the categories in
> ---Wikipedia.
> ---
> ---Cheers,
> ---
> ---Antoine
> ---
> ---On 9/16/14 5:46 PM, Bosch, Thomas wrote:
> ---> Hi,
> --->
> ---> I changed the label "requirements classes" to "requirement classification".
> --->
> ---> I would suggest this order for the fields of requirements:
> --->
> ---> 1. label
> ---> 2. alphanumeric ID
> ---> 3. definition
> ---> 4. requirement classification
> ---> 5. description
> ---> 6. examples
> ---> 7. use cases
> --->
> ---> --> switch definition and requirement classification
> --->
> --->
> ---> Cheers,
> ---> Thomas
> --->
> ---> --------Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> ---> ---Von: DCMI Architecture Forum [mailto:DC-
> [log in to unmask]]
> ---> ---Im Auftrag von Antoine Isaac
> ---> ---Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. September 2014 17:23
> ---> ---An: [log in to unmask]
> ---> ---Betreff: [RDF AP] Suggested change in interface for requirement DB
> ---> ---
> ---> ---Hi,
> ---> ---
> ---> ---While browsing around I realize some of the confusion around the classes
> ---of
> ---> ---requirements might be caused the unclear label "requirements classes"
> ---used
> ---> ---for linking them from requirements. See at
> ---> ---http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=node/32
> ---> ---
> ---> ---It would be clearer if the label makes it clear that this is a classification of
> ---the
> ---> ---current requirement. Something like "requirement classification" could be
> ---> ---already better.
> ---> ---And in fact it could also be put in the bottom of the page. As it stands now,
> ---the
> ---> ---classification is something that should be elicited after having defined
> ---what
> ---> ---the requirement is, not before...
> ---> ---
> ---> ---Cheers,
> ---> ---
> ---> ---Antoine
> --->
>
|