5.1 KiB
5.1 KiB
RC-042: Review of BC-001
Metadata
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| ID | RC-042 |
| CrossReference | BC-001, QC-BC-001, QC-LANG-001 |
Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-15 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version | 768ca34 |
Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: BC-001
- Checklist used: QC-BC-001, and QC-LANG-001 (language and domain)
- Scope: full review
- Language and domain: en / it
- Language reviewer: none (the stand-in for S01 reads the language and knows the domain)
- Mode: autonomous, not independent (reviewer is
AI as stand-in for S01)
Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ROI/Cost-Benefit analysis is quantitative, or where qualitative, is explicitly justified | Pass | The Cost-Benefit table is qualitative and says why: no revenue is expected, so a quantitative return does not apply. |
| 2 | Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation | Pass | The Risks table has 5 risks, each with an impact and a mitigation. |
| 3 | Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations | Pass | The Success Criteria table has 8 rows with numeric targets and a measure each (for example 0 third-party packages; 5 commands or fewer). |
| 4 | Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope | Pass | Scope has ### In Scope and ### Out of Scope; the executable is added to In Scope and the installer, signing and release upload are named in Out of Scope. |
| 5 | Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline | Pass | The Stakeholders table cites S01, S02 and S03 and does not re-describe their roles. |
| 6 | Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman) | Pass | Methodological and Standards Foundation names the framework, Larman, ISO/IEC 25010:2023 and PEP 8. |
| 7 | Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another | Pass | Assumptions and Constraints are separate sections. |
| 8 | Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation | Pass | Recommendation reads Proceed with a one-sentence rationale. |
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 |
Pass | Metadata of BC-001 has `Language |
| 2 | Language is a BCP 47 code and Domain is a value from the registry's domain list |
Pass | en is a BCP 47 code and it is a value of the registry's domain list. |
| 3 | The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language | Pass | Prose and table cells are English; Malay and Danish words and file names appear only as quoted data. |
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | The registry gives IT Executive English for this type; the text is written for that reader. |
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | The PO terms of DICT-001 (flash card, word list, words to learn, study session) are used and no synonym replaces them. |
| 6 | Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English | Pass | Metadata keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English. |
| 7 | No translated twin (<name>.<language>.md) exists beside the document |
Pass | No translated twin exists beside the document (checked in docs/). |
| 8 | A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again | Pass | First version; no change of language or domain since an earlier accepted version. |
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | The reviewer is the stand-in for S01, the Product Owner, who reads English and knows the IT domain; no second language reviewer is needed (review-checklist-process step 2). Open to challenge by S01 in the end-of-run summary. |
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Fail | CSV, MVVM, UI, PO and similar abbreviations are not all spelled out at first use; Optional, deferred. |
Overall Verdict
Go — every Mandatory criterion passes; the failed Optional criteria are deferred with an action item. Reviewed by AI as stand-in for S01; not independent of the author.
Full review (not a delta) after the change for MIL-009 (executable).
Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|
| Criterion LANG 10 (Optional) failed: Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language; fix or accept the deferral | S01 | 2026-10-21 |