This week in the ux-clinic discussion group:
I work for a large medical software company that attempts to follow a strict engineering process (partly for ISO certification). All logged bugs are supposed to be tied to a requirement (we use ReqPro), but managers aren’t sure what to do with “visual” bugs because visuals aren’t included in the official requirements docs.
So the big question is: What is the best way to fit the visual/UI deliverables into the engineering process?
Specifically:
- How best to deliver visuals? PDF? HTML?
- If designers don’t write the req documents, even if we wanted to, how do we get the designs into the requirements?
- How should visuals relate to the written requirements?
This week in the pm-clinic discussion forum:
I’m a lead programmer on a web 2.0′ish startup. Our team of 7 released an alpha version last week and we’re planning the final release, and need to make partner date commitments for launch.
Our biggest debate is buffer. All of our experienced programmers have pet philsoophies about buffer and I’m looking for someone to dispell the myths and give real advice on: Should buffer be used at all? When? why? Where do you put it in the schedule? Do you tell the team? And what are common stupid things arrogant leads do with buffer that shoot themselves in the foot and how can we avoid?
thanks,
- Wannabe buffermaster (WB)
When Steve McConnell asks you to speak somewhere, it’s hard to say no. I’ve been invited to round out the stellar speaking ticket of Joel Spolsky, Watts Humprhey, Steve McConnell and Ed Yordon at Construx software’s annual executive software summit in Seattle, October 16-18.
Paraphrasing from their website:
The Construx Software-Executive Summit is a forum for top software executives to share, analyze, evaluate, and improve their experiences at the enterprise level. Participants develop new insights into their own organizations and explore challenges and opportunities with a select group of peers. Last year’s event was a huge success: 100% of attendies would return again.
At the 2005 Summit, 98% of participants held titles of VP, CTO, Director, or higher. The main criteria for attendence is multi-project responsibility for software development.
It’s an exclusive event – I don’t qualify myself – and there are only 60 seats for the whole thing. It’s a rare opportunity for executive level managers to experience a peer focused conference. The $3k fee includes a voucher for $1195 in free training from Construx for anyone in your org – so check out the agenda and registration info.
There are several thousand ways to complete the sentence “There are two kinds of people, those that…” And in case the universe wouldn’t be complete without another, here’s one more.
There are two kinds of people: people that make things complex and people that simplify.
Complexifiers are averse to reduction. Their instincts are to turn simple assignments into quagmires, and to reject simple ideas until they’re buried (or asphyxiated) in layers of abstraction. These are the people who write 25 page specifications when a picture will do and send long e-mails to the entire team when one phone call would suffice. When they see x=y, they want to play with it and show their talents, taking pleasure in creating the unneccesary (23x*z = 23y*z). They take pride in consuming more bandwith, time, and paitence than needed, and expect rewards for it.
Simplifiers thrive on concision. They look for the 6x=6y in the world, and happily turn it into x=y. They never let their ego get in the way of the short path. When you give them seemingly complicated tasks they simplify, consolidate and re-interpret on instinct, naturally seeking the simplest way to achieve what needs to be done. They find ways to communicate complex ideas in simple terms without losing the idea’s essense or power.
I don’t know what makes a person fall into either pile (genetics, habit, experience?), but I do know I’d much rather spend my time with the simplifiers than the complexifiers. Don’t you think all the good designers, programmers, writers, philosophers and teachers you’ve known fit into the simplifer group?
In the unexplainable department: I have a copy of the artofpm in my office that’s already been personally signed for someone named Edward. I have no idea at this point who Edward was or why I signed a copy for him.
As it’s not much good to the largely non-Edward named population I don’t really know what to do with it. So:
The first person named Edward that leaves a comment gets it sent to them.
For years I was a notorious corner folder. I’d mark corners of passages I needed for research with a fold, making bibliophiles cringe and scream. I do hate prestine books and book preservers: these things are made to be used and I love nothing more than to see good books marked up, post-it noted and coffee stained, signs the book has lived and not sat for eternity on a shelf.
But then, I love books and it’s really not nice to mark up books that aren’t yours (friends, libraries, etc). If I had a better way I’d use it, I just didn’t know of one. So when I showed my brother-in-law a particular good book (with my folds on every other page) his eyes lit up. That Christmas I was gifted a set of book darts.
Book darts are small arrow shaped strips of metal that you can place on pages to mark a passage. They are easy to use, easy to remove, and do zero damage to books. It’s a great paper clip-esque design: minimal and clever.
I use these things so much in my research that I own several hundred of them (I’m faster at marking pages than I am at reviewing the marks later).
They’re sold in various quantities at bookdarts.com and some bookstores sell them too. If you are student or writer and spend your days making notes in books, I highly recommend them.