[codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-ambiguous and give them priorities.
"codec issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Tue, 23 March 2010 17:29 UTC
Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79C993A6C5D for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:29:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -98.87
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.87 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_50=0.001, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g1CMzBk4oEom for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17803A6C18 for <codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1Nu7vI-0005gu-Bx; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:29:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: codec issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.6
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.6, by Edgewall Software
To: hoene@uni-tuebingen.de
X-Trac-Project: codec
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:29:48 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/codec/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/codec/trac/ticket/2
Message-ID: <062.b149f0b1dc7ef14a97a419277d72116d@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 2
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: hoene@uni-tuebingen.de, codec@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Subject: [codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-ambiguous and give them priorities.
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Reply-To: trac@localhost.amsl.com
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:29:29 -0000
#2: Please identify Requirements non-ambiguous and give them priorities.
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Reporter: hoene@… | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: requirements | Version:
Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords:
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
I would suggest to add structure the requirement document.
Especially, in the upcoming time of requirements discussion, it might be
useful to number all single requirements and give them priorities.
One could use a hierarchical numbering scheme and priorities such as
trival, minor, major...
--
Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/codec/trac/ticket/2>
codec <http://tools.ietf.org/codec/>
- [codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-ambi… codec issue tracker
- Re: [codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-… codec issue tracker
- Re: [codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-… Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #2: Please identify Requirements non-… codec issue tracker