[TSG-Access-RD] Our final work product

[Andrew Newton]

Ram,

I agree on the components. As for the name of output, Design
Specification or Technical Model seem fine to me. I actually like
Technical Model. :)

-andy

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:17 AM Ram Mohan <rmohan at afilias.info> wrote:
>
> Team:
>
> I suggest that our final work product should have at least the following components:
>
> A proper preamble/introduction [Audience: Non-technical]
> A glossary of terms [Audience: Technical]
> Design/technical assumptions [Audience: Technical]
> Problem definition [Audience: Non-technical]
> Design specification [Audience: Technical]
> Areas for future consideration [Audience: Non-technical and technical]
>
>
>
> What should we call our final work product?
>
> Technical Specification: From my engineer’s perspective, this is a pretty well defined term. Is that what we want to call what we produce?
> Design Specification: A bit more fuzzy, but perhaps more indicative of the work we are going to produce?
> Technical Model: Seems to not be as descriptive or accurate of what we intend to produce.
> Technical Framework: I don’t believe we set out to provide a framework, so this sounds incongruous.
>
>
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> -Ram
>
>
>
>