Talk:Software requirements specification

message: IEEE defines a requirement as 
   "1. A condition of capability needed by the a user to solve a problem or achieve  an objective.
    2. A condition or a capability that must be met or possessed by a system... to satisfy a    
       contract ,standard ,specification , or other formal imposed document."
i would like to ask what is the difference between requirement in general and requirement specification?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.48.114.196 (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: IEEE defines a requirement as

message: Does SRS always mean IEEE 830? If yes, then this article should be upgraded based on information from IEEE reference document.
→ I'd say not.  You can use the general waterfall phases (requirements->design->implementation->test), and have an SRS be the interface between reqs and design phases, w/o necessarily complying with or even using IEEE 830.
199.171.110.112 21:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SRS = IEEE 830? 

message: The linked article, <A HREF="http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/staff/turnr/publications/foundations-specification.pdf">"The Foundations of Specification"</A> is not about building an SRS, but rather a description of formal specification, reducing requirements to predicate logic statements. I will remove it to see if anyone protests. -Fuzzy (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance of linked article 

message: 1. An SRS is not a "complete" description of a system.  An SRS is one of a number of different specifications required to provide a complete description.
2. Use cases are not a mandatory part of an SRS.  Use cases should employed when system USE needs to be defined.  If there is no user-system interaction, use cases should be avoided.  I see far too much ABuse of use cases attempting to document what a state machine diagram, or simply a section of a document containing paragraphs would better represent.
... I could probably continue the list but I've only started my first cup of coffee this morning. ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeconte (talk • contribs) 14:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  It says they should be written by a programmer or architect which is incorrect incorrect. Colinrhammond (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is misleading 

message: I removed the PROD on this page. As noted in my summary, the SRS is an extremely important concept in software engineering to-date and deserves its own page. This page needs a LOT of work, but it should not be deleted. --Mpdelbuono (talk) 23:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  PROD Contested 

message: Does this page conform to relevant Wikipedia styles? It doesn't feel to me like it is part of Wikipedia, but more like it was copied from somewhere (the IEEE standard?) and simply edited to a "walkthrough" style. There needs to be more discussion on the SRS itself, and I really think that the whole style of the document, aside from the opening paragraph reads too much like a page designed to tell you how to write an SRS, not an encyclopedia article on the SRS document, and the IEEE standard that is most commonly associated with it.
Also, is there a particular reason that we have the IEEE definition for a requirement at the top of this page? Bobbias (talk) 05:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia style? 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
* Support, I think this is standard Wikipedia style unless it is a trademark or proper name. Cross porpoises (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I think there should be a separate IEEE 830 article if one is needed. SRS has been around a long time and IEEE 830 is only one version. This article does not reference IEEE 830 (except in external links) nor does it comply with it. I think this article should be about the general concept of SRS and a future IEEE 830 article could be created for that specific implementation. As I see it, this would simply require removing both the IEEE SW standards template and the external links to the standards and editing the template to reference a redlinked IEEE 830 article. Jojalozzo 16:14, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is NOT about IEEE 830 

message: IEEE 830 has been superseded by ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148. This should be mentioned in the article. Information about SRS in the new document should be incorporated in the article. --217.243.209.74 (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEEE 830 superseded 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Acceptance criteria. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Acceptance criteria" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:IEEE software documents which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 22:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Make a suggestion in voice 175.101.104.23 (talk) 06:25, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software Engineer 

message: First link to references is not working anymore, we need a new source or remove that one 2620:0:1000:2514:D526:DF3C:50A0:7485 (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First link to references is not working anymore, we need a new source or remove that one