small medium large xlarge

Generic-user-small
01 Feb 2012, 23:02
Ralph Shnelvar (4 posts)

I am reading pages 36 & 37

I think I understand what you are trying to get at be the ambiguity of pronouns is confusing me.

In these scenarios, who am “I”? Who is “you”?

Am I the robot who happens to be in a good mood thus ascribing feelings to a robot? I me, the robot is asserted to be happy and thus has feelings.

In the second scenario. Who is attacking a happy robot? I’m in a good mood and I attack a happy robot? Who am I?

Very confusing.

Aslak_devil_pragsmall
05 Feb 2012, 11:33
Aslak Hellesøy (17 posts)

Great observation! We didn’t deliberately intend to make this ambiguous, but it clearly is.

This is great example of how requirements get misinterpreted. Something that is obvious to one person might be interpreted differently by another. This is a typical situation where you would have a chat and come up with better, less ambiguous wording with less room for misunderstanding.

Generic-user-small
05 Feb 2012, 18:00
Ralph Shnelvar (4 posts)

I would appreciate an attribution for “The Shnelvar Rule” of specifications: Don’t use pronouns. What is obvious to one person may not be obvious to another.

You must be logged in to comment