# 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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-28 | Proposed | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 (AI as stand-in, autonomous mode) | Initial version | [dcef5e6] |

---

## Artifact Under Review

- Instance reviewed: [SA-001]
- Checklist used: [QC-SA-001]
- Scope: full review
- Language and domain: en / it
- Language reviewer: none (stand-in 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 | Power/Interest grid is filled for every stakeholder, with no gaps or unclassified entries | Pass | S01 to S03 each have power, interest and quadrant. |
| 2 | Each stakeholder is assigned a unique, stable ID (e.g. S01-S11 style) reusable for RACI assignments in other artifacts | Pass | IDs S01 to S03, stable, used by BC, PP and MIL documents. |
| 3 | Roles and organizational context are defined with explicit Power and Interest levels, not just narrative description | Pass | role, organization, power and interest given as levels. |
| 4 | Communication needs (channel, frequency, deliverable type) are mapped to project phases or milestones | Pass | four communication rows tied to milestones. |
| 5 | Conflicting stakeholder interests are identified with documented mitigation or resolution strategies | Pass | three conflicts, each with a mitigation. |
| 6 | Stakeholder concerns are explicitly traced to Business Case objectives | Pass | traceability table maps each concern to BC-001 objectives O1 to O6. |
| 7 | Primary concerns are expressed in both business language and a recognized quality-attribute mapping (e.g. FURPS+) | Pass | CN-001 to CN-009 each mapped to a FURPS+ attribute. |
| 8 | Document is understandable and navigable by non-technical stakeholders reviewing their own entry | Pass | short tables, plain wording. |
| 9 | Every concern has a stable ID (`CN-NNN`) in the concern register, with the stakeholder who raised it; IDs are never renumbered or reused | Pass | CN-001 to CN-009 stable and name the stakeholder who raised them. |

## 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 | Language `en` and Domain `it` in Metadata. |
| 2 | `Language` is a BCP 47 code and `Domain` is a value from the registry's domain list | Pass | `en` is BCP 47; `it` is in the registry domain list. |
| 3 | The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language | Pass | Whole content is English. |
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | IT Executive English for BC and PP, IT Professional English for SA and MIL, per the registry; MIL/BC/PP keep short, decision-oriented sentences. |
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | No `DICT` exists; terms are standard IT terms (scraping, fixture, workflow). No synonyms found for them. |
| 6 | Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English | Pass | Keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English. |
| 7 | No translated twin (`<name>.<language>.md`) exists beside the document | Pass | No `*.en.md` or other twin exists 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 in this language; no change since an accepted version. |
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | Stand-in for S01 (Product Owner, developer) confirms the IT terms; not independent (autonomous mode). |
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Pass | Abbreviations (PO, SA, MIL, CI, BC) are defined in the framework and used consistently; PO is spelled out in the SA. |

## Overall Verdict

Go — no Mandatory criterion fails and none is Pending. The review is a stand-in review by the author's tool for S01 in autonomous mode and is not independent; S01 challenges it in the run summary.

## Action Items

| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | S01 | 2026-10-28 |

---

[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
[dcef5e6]: https://git.tirsystem.com/Tirsvad-Udemy-100-days-of-code/045-scrape-movies/commit/dcef5e6e6e7ec16162817d3ec0ce1b303e0a3a63