So much for resolutions. It has been almost a month since my last post and I feel suitably disappointed with myself. And today I only have a short post:
I am repeatedly surprised by the vehemence of different analyst communities on issues of approach (and predictably on the rightness of their approach over all others). One consistent topic that always seems to provoke strong reactions is the question of requirement documentation via use case versus user story.
Personally I suspect that either and/or both approaches can be usefully applied (but then I always was a tiresome moderate) and that ultimately it mostly depends upon the content - I have seen (and written) variants of both that failed to extract what the underlying goal and business need of the user is and the sexiest template in the world was never going to fix them.
That said, I do appreciate that both approaches have value and should be in the analyst's arsenal. So I was delighted to read a posting on John Babcock's blog providing a great overview of thinking on this topic - he has put together a bunch of links to articles and sites that compare and contrast the approaches (of course both Fowler and Cockburn are represented, but there are several other interesting sources).
On reflection, I like the simplicity of user stories and their closeness to real world language, but they do not replace a well constructed use case model (as often as not, it is the model rather than the details that is really valuable) to help make sure that the requirements are complete. So both have value - use what makes sense for a given situation (and that could easily mean both) - how heavyweight do you need to be to ensure that you are capturing all the complexity of your project?
So, no strong reaction on my side. How moderate and boring.
Tough.
