<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Requirement Visualization: Mock-up &amp; Wireframe Goodies</title>
	<atom:link href="http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/</link>
	<description>Practical Insight for Business Analysts and Project Professionals</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:35:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JB</title>
		<link>http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/comment-page-1/#comment-6168</link>
		<dc:creator>JB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:44:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://practicalanalyst.com/?p=1047#comment-6168</guid>
		<description>Good to see you again, Todd, and thanks for sharing the link. You&#039;re right. Good requirements are a must, and my idea isn&#039;t to replace the spec. doc, just to supplement it.  
 
Once enough requirements have been specified to enable the team to make some assumptions as to what the solution *might* or *could* look like, you can sanity check your requirements with the customer by taking a stab at a picture - or having your designer do it, as the case may be. As you draw out more requirements, the picture gets clearer; as the picture gets clearer, you tend to draw out the remaining requirements..  
 
The idea is that when requirements are put in a visual context, your chances of getting the customer to actually review them increases (as opposed to the 70 page doc of &quot;system shalls&quot;), and the chances of them understanding them the way you intended them really skyrocket. 1 hour ago  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good to see you again, Todd, and thanks for sharing the link. You&#039;re right. Good requirements are a must, and my idea isn&#039;t to replace the spec. doc, just to supplement it.  </p>
<p>Once enough requirements have been specified to enable the team to make some assumptions as to what the solution *might* or *could* look like, you can sanity check your requirements with the customer by taking a stab at a picture &#8211; or having your designer do it, as the case may be. As you draw out more requirements, the picture gets clearer; as the picture gets clearer, you tend to draw out the remaining requirements..  </p>
<p>The idea is that when requirements are put in a visual context, your chances of getting the customer to actually review them increases (as opposed to the 70 page doc of &quot;system shalls&quot;), and the chances of them understanding them the way you intended them really skyrocket. 1 hour ago</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: toddpollock</title>
		<link>http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/comment-page-1/#comment-6161</link>
		<dc:creator>toddpollock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:48:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://practicalanalyst.com/?p=1047#comment-6161</guid>
		<description>Another gem, Jonathan. I am currently deep in the battle of requirements versus wireframes. I feel like I have this debate once a year. I tried Balsamiq a while back thanks to a post by a buddy of mine (&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wireframes.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wireframes.php&lt;/a&gt;&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wiref... I thought it was a fantastic tool and we put it in front of a client. Ultimately, we stuck with good old requirements and let the mocks fall out. As brainstorming tools, I&#039;m all for mocks. You simply have to have good requirements though, imo. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another gem, Jonathan. I am currently deep in the battle of requirements versus wireframes. I feel like I have this debate once a year. I tried Balsamiq a while back thanks to a post by a buddy of mine (<a href="http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wireframes.php" rel="nofollow">&lt;a href=&#8221;http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wireframes.php</a>&#8221; target=&#8221;_blank&#8221;&gt;http://blog.websolvers.com/2009/01/web_site_wiref&#8230; I thought it was a fantastic tool and we put it in front of a client. Ultimately, we stuck with good old requirements and let the mocks fall out. As brainstorming tools, I&#39;m all for mocks. You simply have to have good requirements though, imo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DougGtheBA</title>
		<link>http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/comment-page-1/#comment-6162</link>
		<dc:creator>DougGtheBA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://practicalanalyst.com/?p=1047#comment-6162</guid>
		<description>Jonathan: 
 
I like the idea of visualizing, but constantly battling the tendency to provide the &quot;How&quot; as opposed to the &quot;What&quot; when gathering requirements really gets in the way many times. I&#039;d like to hear your thoughts on managing this problem, which is exacerbated when putting prototyping of any kind on the table. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan: </p>
<p>I like the idea of visualizing, but constantly battling the tendency to provide the &quot;How&quot; as opposed to the &quot;What&quot; when gathering requirements really gets in the way many times. I&#039;d like to hear your thoughts on managing this problem, which is exacerbated when putting prototyping of any kind on the table.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Babcock</title>
		<link>http://practicalanalyst.com/2009/04/27/requirement-visualization-mock-up-wireframe-goodies/comment-page-1/#comment-8057</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Babcock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://practicalanalyst.com/?p=1047#comment-8057</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;New blog post: Requirement Visualization: Mock-up &amp; Wireframe Goodies http://tinyurl.com/djff58&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">New blog post: Requirement Visualization: Mock-up &#038; Wireframe Goodies <a href="http://tinyurl.com/djff58" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/djff58</a></span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
