68 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
68 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
# Review of BC-001
|
||
|
||
## Metadata
|
||
| Key | Value |
|
||
| --- | --- |
|
||
| ID | RC-001 |
|
||
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [QC-BC-001] |
|
||
|
||
## Version History
|
||
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|
||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||
| 2026-10-28 | Proposed | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version | [01e016e] |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Artifact Under Review
|
||
|
||
- Instance reviewed: [BC-001]
|
||
- Checklist used: [QC-BC-001] (`QC-BC-001`)
|
||
- Scope: full review
|
||
- Language and domain: en / it
|
||
- Language reviewer: S01 (confirmed criteria 3, 5, 9 in chat on 2026-10-28)
|
||
- 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 | Cost–Benefit table is qualitative and says why: no revenue, value is learning and sharing. |
|
||
| 2 | Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation | Pass | Risks table has 5 risks, each with impact and mitigation. |
|
||
| 3 | Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations | Pass | Success Criteria table has 7 numeric or checkable targets (100 titles, 0 duplicates, at most 3 dependencies). |
|
||
| 4 | Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope | Pass | `### In Scope` and `### Out of Scope` are separate. |
|
||
| 5 | Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline | Pass | Stakeholders table cites S01, S02, S03 only; no roles are re-described. |
|
||
| 6 | Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman) | Pass | Foundation section names the framework, Larman and ISO/IEC 25010:2023. |
|
||
| 7 | Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another | Pass | Assumptions and Constraints are separate lists. |
|
||
| 8 | Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation | Pass | Recommendation says `Proceed` with one reason. |
|
||
|
||
## 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` are 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 | Confirmed by S01 in chat on 2026-10-28 (the document is English prose). |
|
||
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | Register `IT Executive English` or `IT Professional English` per the registry table. |
|
||
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | Confirmed by S01 in chat on 2026-10-28; no dictionary (DICT) exists yet, so the terms are the standard IT terms. |
|
||
| 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 translated twin exists. |
|
||
| 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 language change. |
|
||
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | Confirmed by S01 in chat on 2026-10-28 (S01 is the domain expert and reads English). |
|
||
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Pass | Abbreviations are spelled out at first use (PO, ARB, QC, FURPS+). |
|
||
|
||
## Overall Verdict
|
||
|
||
Go — every Mandatory criterion passes; no blocking finding. Language criteria 3, 5 and 9 were confirmed by S01 in chat on 2026-10-28, so none stays `Pending`.
|
||
|
||
## Action Items
|
||
|
||
| Action | Owner | Due |
|
||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||
| None | S01 | - |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
[BC-001]: ../../business-case.md
|
||
[QC-BC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/artifacts/qc-business-case.md
|
||
[01e016e]: https://git.tirsystem.com/Tirsvad-Udemy-100-days-of-code/046-scraping-the-billboard/commit/01e016e15dd93cface4f4ae9e9e99919e0aace2b
|