#564 lg 03 07 interface characteristics

[gernotstarke]

looking for feedback

[github-actions]

Build Successful! You can find a link to the downloadable artifacts below.

Name	Link
Commit	ab81b56
Logs	https://github.com/isaqb-org/curriculum-foundation/actions/runs/11373096152
Download	https://github.com/isaqb-org/curriculum-foundation/suites/29714142522/artifacts/2065568862

[rhoadesre]

Please separate the two changes.
I am fine with the resolution of the original issue (interface characteristics), but the documentation of quality requirements is a completely different issue.
And I, like Daniel, definitely do not agree that a decision was made regarding this latter issue.

[alxlo]

Mit der "hohen Bedeutung" hätte ich noch etwas Formulierungsbauchschmerzen. Ansonsten finde ich die Änderungen ganz gut. Die Systematiserung der Charakteristika ist sicher nicht vollendet, aber gut genug.

[gernotstarke]

I took the liberty of slightly updated the wording again:

1.) the introductory paragraph.

DE:

Softwarearchitekt:innen kennen die kritische Bedeutung von Schnittstellen für die Interaktion zwischen Architekturbausteinen und zwischen dem System und externen Elementen.
Sie können solche Schnittstellen entwerfen und spezifizieren.

EN:

Software architects know the critical importance of interfaces for the interaction between architectural building blocks or between the system and external elements.
They can design and specify such interfaces.

2. First section

we had "know desired characteristics" .... and then "and use these in their design".
That was plain wrong - as we cannot USE a characteristic, but need to ACHIEVE them.

new version:

DE:

Sie kennen ... wünschenswerte Eigenschaften von Schnittstellen und können diese beim Entwurf erreichen (R1)

EN:

They know ... desired characteristics of interfaces and can achieve them in the design (R1)

In addition, I changed "festlegen" to "spezifizieren" in the DE version.

The merge-base changed after approval.

The merge-base changed after approval.

[rhoadesre]

I'm fine with these changes, but the changes are blocked.
@uli: is this because of your change request or mine?

outdated

[sippsack]

Looks good. I like the ADR. 👍 (eat your own dog food)

The merge-base changed after approval.

[kraemerdr]

@sippsack The ADR has accidentally been introduced in this issue and belongs to #597 instead. ;-)
What exactly do you mean with 'eat your own dog food' in this case?

[gernotstarke]

It should better be called "drink your own champagne", a little less disgusting ...

I guess @sippsack referred to the ongoing recital of "use ADRs to document architectural decisions" - and we used an ADR ourselves to document OUR decision...

[gernotstarke]

shall I open a NEW PR with ONLY the interface-related change in it?
So it becomes better comparable to the existing version?

[sippsack]

@kraemerdr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food

I thought the ADR belongs to this PR. I didn't recognize that it belongs somewhere else.

[kraemerdr]

@sippsack I know the phrase, of course, but was wondering what the 'dog food' actually is here. If you meant ADRs in general, that makes perfect sense. ;-)

[gernotstarke]

I close this one, as the many changes are too difficult to track. I have opened a new PR #659 on a fresh branch