A Programmers View Of Specs

"The developer working from the spec has, ideally, all of their questions answered about the application and can start building it. And since this is a spec that was approved by the client, they are building nothing less than what the client is expecting. There should be nothing left to guess or interpret when the spec is completed..."
(from the article)

Hallelujah, now all you have to do is buy one of those new-fangled 4GL systems that writes code from specs and you can get rid of us programmers completely. If you can also put some 'paint by numbers' diagrams into the spec, I'm sure you could get a trained monkey to colour it in for you, and do away with the 'graphic designers' too. Now if only it could deal with those darned users as well.

I also love specs, because they give me a change to have a conversation with the designers, managers, etc. in a language we can all understand (hopefully). But in my experience specs are often used as a sledgehammer to beat team members into submission. I have quite often received specs via e-mail asking me to approve them in 24 hours (with a chance to comment, of course.)

An over reliance on written specs and sign-offs can result in an project where the 'spec consumers' feel alienated and disempowered. Power Crazed Managers love specs that have to be followed to the letter, because it gives them a way of controlling the team without having to understand what they do, because they can always quote verbatim from the spec to shut you up.

If people are left out of the design and decision makeing process, then they will use the only power they have left (obstruction, sabotage, and bad-mouthing) to exercise some control over what they are working on.

After she exhibited a new feature, called a slide show, to be activated by clicking on illustrations in pop-ups, I asked Gamill why he had not objected to it, as it was nearly impossible to code. "Its' just her," he said, mindful of the rebuke delivered to him by Bartholomew at his last employee review. "If it was anyone else, I'd say, 'There's no way I can do it.' Now I'll just wait till the next priorities meeting, then say, 'It'll take two man-months to implement this,' and that will be that." He laughed.
I Sing The Body Electronic
Fred Moody

Oh and don't tell me that someone will go back to their mamangement after some usability sessions that show the 'signed-off' spec needs to go back to the drawing board, will tell their managers that the spec 'they' signed-off will have to be scrapped, but they will get a new one to them for sign-off in a week or so....

Posted by: Mac on July 1, 2002 04:52 AM

 

Obviously, functional specs aren't for everyone. Frankly, reading the tutorial gave me the willies from a design standpoint (it seems to suck the joy out of development), but I really enjoyed how well laid out the tutorial was, and I was able to extract information that I find extremely useful. Parts of it summed up what I've been thinking but never put down on paper. Overall, it's a very good tutorial, and certainly for people who like functional specs, I'm sure it will become an instant "rule book."

Posted by: Lydia on July 1, 2002 01:31 PM

 

Yes, Mac does indeed seem to have an absence of existence short of pining over the dreaded MANAGER! Da-da-daaaa! Look out man! Better put away your spec!

Really...how could anyone argue with the master of the spec, the amazing, the fantastic, the maturing (I might add), the one, the only...

MOJOFAT?!

Posted by: Bryan Timmins on July 9, 2002 05:12 PM

 

Yes, Mac does indeed seem to have an absence of existence short of pining over the dreaded MANAGER! Da-da-daaaa! Look out man! Better put away your spec!

Really...how could anyone argue with the master of the spec, the amazing, the fantastic, the maturing (I might add), the one, the only...

MOJOFAT!

Posted by: Bryan Timmins on July 9, 2002 05:12 PM