6.0 KiB
6.0 KiB
RC-003 Review of PP-001
Metadata
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| ID | RC-003 |
| CrossReference | PP-001, QC-PP-001, QC-LANG-001 |
Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-28 | Accepted | Claude (AI) | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version: Go | b344b6e |
Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: PP-001
- Checklist used: QC-PP-001 and QC-LANG-001
- Scope: full review
- Language and domain: en / it (the artifact's Metadata rows)
- Language reviewer: none (S01 reads the language and knows the domain; the stand-in applies S01's role)
- Mode: autonomous, not independent (the reviewer is
AI as stand-in for S01)
Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The plan states its start date, end date and the constraint it must fit | Pass | Start 2026-10-28, end 2026-11-02; the Business Case has no deadline, which the plan says. |
| 2 | Every milestone or gateway is listed once with its document, decision date and owner | Pass | Five gateways, each with document, decision date and owner S01, each linking to its MIL-*. |
| 3 | Every decision date lies inside the plan's window and is consistent with the dates in the linked MIL-* document |
Pass | Decision dates in the plan equal the Target Date in each MIL-* and lie inside the window. |
| 4 | Every in-scope item of the Business Case is delivered at a named gateway (scope coverage) | Pass | Scope Coverage maps every In Scope item to a gateway. |
| 5 | Dependencies between gateways are stated, acyclic and consistent with the schedule order | Pass | Dependency chain MIL-001 to MIL-005 is acyclic and follows the schedule order. |
| 6 | The plan states what happens to later gateways and to the end date when a gateway is No-Go | Pass | Plan states that a No-Go moves later gateways and the end date, and that S01 decides. |
| 7 | Owners, reviewers and escalation roles use Stakeholder Analysis IDs and match the governance RACI | Pass | Owners are S01; no governance document exists in this project, so there is no RACI to contradict. |
| 8 | Planning assumptions are listed with their source, and a changed baseline is recorded with its reason | Pass | Planning Assumptions give their source. |
| 9 | Plan risks are listed with impact and a mitigation, and trace to Business Case risks where they come from there | Pass | Plan Risks have impact and mitigation and cite the Business Case risks they come from. |
| 10 | Open issues are listed, and none contradicts a statement elsewhere in the plan | Pass | Open Issues are current and do not contradict the plan. |
| 11 | Each gateway's main deliverable is stated and matches the deliverable of its MIL-* document |
Pass | Each deliverable matches the Deliverable of its MIL-*. |
| 12 | Gateways that deliver user stories name them, and those that do not say why | Pass | Stories column says "none (technical tasks)". |
| 13 | The schedule view (table, Gantt) and the dependency view agree with each other | Pass | Gantt bars and the table agree; the chain matches the dependency list. |
| 14 | Each gateway is linked to its issue-tracker milestone, or marked as not yet synced | Pass | Each gateway is marked not yet synced. |
| 15 | The plan is a singleton: one Project Plan per project, changes recorded in Version History | Pass | One Project Plan; Version History present. |
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 |
| 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; it is in the registry's domain list. |
| 3 | The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language | Pass | All prose and table cells are English; quoted file names and code stay as they are. |
| 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | Register is IT Executive English. as the registry says for this type. |
| 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | No domain dictionary exists yet, so no PO term can contradict one; the IT terms used (Selenium, CSS selector, Docker, headless, driver) are standard and used with one word per concept. Stand-in judgement, open to challenge. |
| 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 file 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 | Pass | First version; language and domain have not changed. |
| 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | Confirmed by AI as stand-in for S01 (S01 reads English and knows the IT domain, as the registry states). Not independent; open to challenge in the end-of-run summary. |
| 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Pass | Abbreviations used (CSS, API, PNG, FURPS+, e2e) are spelled out on first use where they appear. |
Overall Verdict
Go — Every Mandatory criterion of the type checklist and of QC-LANG-001 passes; no Fail. Stand-in review as AI as stand-in for S01, not independent: S01 can challenge it in the end-of-run summary.
Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|
| None | S01 | n/a |