Andrew Premdas wrote: > James, > > I'd question whether you need to give a monkey's about 'entity'. Whilst > it maybe an essential concept in the overall legal framework that doesn't > mean it has to be in YOUR world. If your software is about recording services > provided to some client and related payments. You can simplify - you can > just choose not to model all that legal stuff. If you model everything > you'll
I have been mulling this over these past few days. I now think that what is wrong, besides having as yet only vague ideas of how this is all meant to work, is that I am injecting too many implementation details into the features and scenarios. Whether or not a client is a stand-alone design element or is dependent upon a superior element of abstraction is really quite beside the point insofar as the presentation of the system to the user is concerned. I now believe that I should just be writing down whatever it is that a client has to be in order to satisfy the business requirements. If we need a higher level of abstraction to capture other attributes then that should remain invisible to the users. Of course, realizing this issue and actually dealing with it are two different things. I will probably experience a great deal of difficulty arriving at a balance between expression and implementation. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
