On 11/20/2010 10:09 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Try rephrasing the benefit.
The benefit is obvious. This is not a procedural problem.You're either giving IBM too much credit or not enough. (I really don't want to know which.)
Suggestions for rewriting a requirement are made during the discussions that occur PRIOR to voting. Back in 1993, these discussions occurred at semi-annual SHARE meetings. Now, it's (mostly) all done on-line. Go to http://www.share.org/ and login. Then, under the "Members" drop-down choose "Requirements - Industry Influence". Click "1. Enter the SHARE Requirements System". (At the moment I see 21 requirements currently open for discussion.)
In any case, this vote took place nearly 18 years ago and the requirement got 3.4 which is a high score (on a scale from -5 to 5).
The sad part is that the person that originally submitted this requirement way back when has long since retired. Even if the messages produced by the "brain dead" IKJTSOxx parser are enhanced during our lifetimes, he'll never know...
-- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 310-338-0400 x318 [email protected] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
