# RC-003 review ## Metadata | Key | Value | | --- | --- | | ID | RC-003 | | CrossReference | [PP-001], [QC-PP-001] | ## Version History | Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2026-11-06 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | AI as stand-in for S01 | Initial version | [fe0f272] | --- ## Artifact Under Review - Instance reviewed: [PP-001] - Checklist used: [QC-PP-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 (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 2026-11-06, end 2026-11-16, fits the Duration constraint of BC-001 | | 2 | Every milestone or gateway is listed once with its document, decision date and owner | Pass | Four gateways, each once, with document, decision date and owner S01 | | 3 | Every decision date lies inside the plan's window and is consistent with the dates in the linked `MIL-*` document | Pass | Decision dates 11-08, 11-10, 11-12, 11-16 equal the MIL target dates and lie in 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 MIL-001 to MIL-004 | | 5 | Dependencies between gateways are stated, acyclic and consistent with the schedule order | Pass | Chain MIL-001 → MIL-002 → MIL-003 → MIL-004 is acyclic and matches the dates | | 6 | The plan states what happens to later gateways and to the end date when a gateway is No-Go | Pass | Dependencies section: a No-Go moves later dates and the end date; S01 decides | | 7 | Owners, reviewers and escalation roles use Stakeholder Analysis IDs and match the governance RACI | Pass | Owner S01 only; no `GOV` exists in this project, so there is no RACI to cross-check | | 8 | Planning assumptions are listed with their source, and a changed baseline is recorded with its reason | Pass | Assumptions list their source, including the planner's date estimate accepted by S01 | | 9 | Plan risks are listed with impact and a mitigation, and trace to Business Case risks where they come from there | Pass | Two plan risks with impact, mitigation and the BC-001 risk they come from | | 10 | Open issues are listed, and none contradicts a statement elsewhere in the plan | Pass | Open issues are current: repository URL, no use cases, wiki location; none contradicts the plan | | 11 | Each gateway's main deliverable is stated and matches the deliverable of its `MIL-*` document | Pass | Each deliverable matches its MIL Deliverable section in substance | | 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 table dates agree; the chain matches the dependency list | | 14 | Each gateway is linked to its issue-tracker milestone, or marked as not yet synced | Pass | Milestone column blank and stated as not yet synced | | 15 | The plan is a singleton: one Project Plan per project, changes recorded in Version History | Pass | One Project Plan, PP-001, with a Version History | ## 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`, no placeholder | | 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 | PP-001 prose and table cells are in English | | 4 | The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type | Pass | Register is IT Executive English for BC, PP and MIL, IT Professional English for SA, as the registry gives | | 5 | Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms | Pass | Only standard IT terms are used (Flask, route, decorator, test); the project has no `DICT` and no PO-specific term needs one | | 6 | Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English | Pass | Metadata keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English | | 7 | No translated twin (`..md`) exists beside the document | Pass | No `.en.md`/`.da.md` 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 | Pass | No change of language or domain; this is the first version | | 9 | A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly | Pass | AI as stand-in for S01 read the terms as correct IT usage; S01 accepted the plan in chat on 2026-11-06. Stand-in decision, not independent; open to challenge in the run summary | | 10 | Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language | Pass | Abbreviations (BC, SA, MIL, GIF, HTML, PR) are spelled out or are standard IT abbreviations | ## Overall Verdict Go — All Mandatory criteria pass after the plan was corrected before review (No-Go effect, risk traceability, stories reason); no blocking finding. ## Action Items | Action | Owner | Due | | --- | --- | --- | | None | S01 | 2026-11-06 | --- [PP-001]: ../../docs/project-plan.md [QC-PP-001]: ../../framework/qc/artifacts/qc-project-plan.md [fe0f272]: https://git.tirsystem.com/Tirsvad-Udemy-100-days-of-code/055-higher-lower/commit/fe0f2722c25220f6efa3b9b2f3d5e01e7f6d90dc