RE: [QSOS-general] ideas QSOS v2 format

[Pilot, Olivier]

Hello,

 

Actually, I don't really see the problem with the first point. I mean, if you're talking about a missing feature, it's quite ok to say that the application you're assessing is "bad" from this point of view. It doesn't shock me. However I agree with the second point.

 

I also have one request. I think it could be worth including the concept of "mandatory" features when scoring. It could be interesting to have the choice in putting either a weighting on a specific feature, either a "mandatory flag". We currently have no mean to represent this using the QSOS format.

 

Cheers

 

O.

_______________________________
Olivier Pilot
Technical Consultant
Technology Strategy and Optimisation (TSO),
Atos Consulting
(Tel: +44 (0)7733 312 654)
mailto:address@hidden
_______________________________

 

---

From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Reiners, Mylene
Sent: 13 November 2006 05:55
To: Gonéri Le Bouder
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [QSOS-general] ideas QSOS v2 format

Hi,

I like your ideas, but how about backward 
compatibility?

Mylene

On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 19:15 +0100, Gonéri Le 
Bouder wrote: 
> Hi folks,
>
>
> Today we have (at last) two know issues with the current XML format of QSOS.
> 1) The scoring style: Today we use in general 0 for a missing feature 
> and 2 for a well implemented feature. A lot of people thinks that ZERO 
> means "bad" and "2" means "good".
> 2) The list: There is no easy way to store a list in a QSOS sheet.
>
> Comments are welcome :).
>
> Regards,
>
>                   Gonéri
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> qsos-general mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qsos-general

_______________________________________________________

 

This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended

solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this

e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it.

As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin group

liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the

sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the

sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will

not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted.

_______________________________________________________