Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax?
sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
Thu Jul 11 05:56:10 UTC 2019
On 10/07/2019 16:10, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Replying to myself.. see below.
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 8:18 AM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org
> <mailto:joel at rtems.org>> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:34 AM Sebastian Huber
> <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>> wrote:
> On 08/07/2019 08:42, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I work currently on a requirements engineering section for
> RTEMS in the
> > RTEMS Software Engineering manual:
> > https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/index.html
> > There should be some recommendations on how to formulate
> > What do you thing about the: Easy Approach to Requirements
> > (EARS)? Has someone used this before? Is it something to
> Just for reference, there is also a follow-up paper:
> These papers were nice to read. I like their categorization of
> requirements and providing
> templates with preferred language. I think their rules on complexity
> are probably on point.
> Whether we agree or disagree with the specific words isn't as
> important as having those
> words and templates.
> I was asking around and apparently other OAR folks knew that EARS was
> being adopted
> as is by some of the large organizations we deal with. These
> organizations do large safety
> critical systems. With that knowledge, I am willing to say we should
> adopt it. If there is
> an authoritative reference, we need to find it.
I guess it will be difficult to find references. These large
organizations tend to keep things secret.
I found a reference that Intel uses it too:
> FWIW we have had similar heated discussions on the FACE Technical
> Standard. The EARS
> guys did a more formal job with patterns but we also ended up with
> preferred wording patterns
> for requirements.
> I guess I need to suggest we consider adopting EARS for the next major
> I agree with having requirements templates/examples. I would take it
> further than the generic
> patterns of EARS. We need some for specific areas like configuration
> parameters, set for
> a Classic API method, set for a POSIX API method, a scheduler, etc.
> These would be more detailed examples and still needed.
Yes, we should add specialized templates if necessary. I will propose to
use EARS in my draft.
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
More information about the devel