# Review of SA-001

## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-002 |
| CrossReference | [SA-001], [QC-SA-001], [QC-LANG-001] |

## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-13 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version | pending |

---

## Artifact Under Review

- Instance reviewed: [SA-001]
- Checklist used: [QC-SA-001]
- Also applied: [QC-LANG-001]
- Scope: full review
- Language and domain: en / it
- Language reviewer: none
- Mode: autonomous, not independent (reviewer is `AI as stand-in for S01`; the author is S01)

## Checklist Results

| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Power/Interest grid is filled for every stakeholder, with no gaps or unclassified entries (Mandatory) | Pass | All three stakeholders have Power, Interest and Quadrant filled. |
| 2 | Each stakeholder is assigned a unique, stable ID (e.g. S01-S11 style) reusable for RACI assignments in other artifacts (Mandatory) | Pass | IDs S01 to S03 are unique and used by BC-001, PP-001 and the milestones. |
| 3 | Roles and organizational context are defined with explicit Power and Interest levels, not just narrative description (Mandatory) | Pass | Role, organisation, power and interest are in the summary table, with a rationale per quadrant. |
| 4 | Communication needs (channel, frequency, deliverable type) are mapped to project phases or milestones (Optional) | Pass | Communication table maps each stakeholder to a milestone (MIL-007, MIL-008). |
| 5 | Conflicting stakeholder interests are identified with documented mitigation or resolution strategies (Mandatory) | Pass | Two conflicts are listed with a mitigation each. |
| 6 | Stakeholder concerns are explicitly traced to Business Case objectives (Mandatory) | Pass | Business Goal Alignment table traces each concern to a BC-001 objective. |
| 7 | Primary concerns are expressed in both business language and a recognized quality-attribute mapping (e.g. FURPS+) (Optional) | Pass | Concerns table maps each concern to a FURPS+ attribute, which is explained in the section. |
| 8 | Document is understandable and navigable by non-technical stakeholders reviewing their own entry (Optional) | Pass | Short document in plain language; each stakeholder can read their own row. |

## Language and Domain Results

| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | The Metadata table has a `Language` row and a `Domain` row, and neither is a placeholder (Mandatory) | Pass | Metadata has Language = en and Domain = it, neither a placeholder. |
| 2 | `Language` is a BCP 47 code and `Domain` is a value from the registry's domain list (Mandatory) | Pass | en is a BCP 47 code; it is in the registry domain list. |
| 3 | The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language (Mandatory) | Pass | All prose and table cells are English, the stated language. Code names stay as written. |
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type (Mandatory) | Pass | IT Professional English register: short sentences, decisions and outcomes first; implementation names appear only where a task needs them. |
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms (Mandatory) | Pass | No domain dictionary (DICT) exists in this project. Terms (car, player, level, finish line, milestone) are used with one word each, matching the assignment. Recorded as a stand-in decision. |
| 6 | Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English (Mandatory) | Pass | Keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English. |
| 7 | No translated twin (`<name>.<language>.md`) exists beside the document (Mandatory) | Pass | No translated twin exists beside the document. |
| 8 | A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again (Mandatory) | Pass | First version; no language change since the previous accepted version. |
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly (Mandatory) | Pass | The reviewer reads English and knows the IT domain; stand-in for S01 (who is the PO and developer). No separate language reviewer. Open to challenge by S01. |
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language (Optional) | Pass | Abbreviations (SQA, QC, CI, RC, API, FURPS+) are spelled out on first use; stakeholder and document IDs are defined in SA-001. |

## Overall Verdict

Go - every Mandatory criterion of QC-SA-001 and QC-LANG-001 passes. The review is not independent: author and reviewer are the same person, with the AI standing in for S01.

## Action Items

| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Challenge this review in the end-of-run summary if the stand-in decisions on QC-LANG-001 criteria 5 and 9 are not accepted | S01 | 2026-10-27 |

---

[SA-001]: ../../stakeholder-analysis.md
[QC-SA-001]: ../../../framework/qc/artifacts/qc-stakeholder-analysis.md
[QC-LANG-001]: ../../../framework/qc/artifacts/qc-language-domain.md