4.1 KiB
4.1 KiB
SQA Review Record: BC-001
Metadata
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| ID | RC-001 |
| CrossReference | BC-001, QC-BC-001, QC-LANG-001 |
Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-28 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version | e1a3d8d |
Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: BC-001
- Checklist used: QC-BC-001
- Scope: full review
- Language and domain: en / it
- Language reviewer: none (the reviewer reads English and knows the IT domain)
- Mode: autonomous, not independent (reviewer: 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 is qualitative and says why (unpaid learning work, no revenue). |
| 2 | Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation | Pass | Five risks, each with impact and mitigation. |
| 3 | Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations | Pass | Six success criteria, each with a target and a measure. |
| 4 | Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope | Pass | Separate ### In Scope and ### Out of Scope sections. |
| 5 | Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline | Pass | Stakeholders table cites S01, S02, S03 and CN-IDs only. |
| 6 | Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman) | Pass | Foundation section names the framework, ISO/IEC 25010:2023, coding conventions. |
| 7 | Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another | Pass | Separate Assumptions and Constraints lists. |
| 8 | Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation | Pass | Recommendation: Proceed, one sentence. |
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 has Language = en and Domain = it. |
| 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 | All prose and table cells are English. |
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | IT Executive English for BC, PP and MIL; IT Professional English for SA, as the registry states. |
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | No DICT exists yet; only standard IT terms are used, with no synonyms for one concept. |
| 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 beside the document. |
| 8 | A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again | N-A | First version: no earlier accepted version, so no language change. |
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | The reviewer (AI as stand-in for S01) reads English and knows the IT domain; not independent. |
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Pass | Abbreviations (ADR, PO, CI, FURPS+) are known to the audience or spelled out. |
Overall Verdict
Go — every Mandatory criterion passes; no blocking finding.
Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|
| None | S01 | n/a |