11.11.2024

Next steps of cross-cutting requirements work (inc. compatibility and reviews of building block specs)

https://govstack.gitbook.io/specification/architecture-and-nonfunctional-requirements/5-cross-cutting-requirements

RFC 2119: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels

RFC 8174: Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words

Model of GovStack CFR next version was being discussed

Proposed categories of requirements:

development, deployment, architecture, quality, security, data

Proposed levels of requirements:

required (100% requirement exptected from all software solutions)
recommended (percentage of compliance is used as a metric, but 0% is accepted)
draft (level of work in progress requirements)
deprecated (requirements may switch levels between published versions)

Proposed extensability values:

protected (cannot be extended by a feature building block specs)
open (can be extended, replaced, even deprecated or made required by feature building block spec)

Proposed versioning standard:

major.minor.fix (1.0.0 etc.)

It was agreed that requirements version releases will be published as a set, individual versions of each requirement are not being tracked.

Proposed XML format for requirements:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="cfr.xsl"?> <cross-functional-requirements version="1.0.0"> <requirement> <category>development</category> <language code="en"> <rule>This is a requirement</rule> <additional> ... </additional> </language> <level>REQUIRED</level> <extensability>protected/open/etc</extensability> <reference>1</reference> </requirement> <requirement> ... <requirement> ... </cross-functional-requirements>

Creation of GovStack overarching terminology

https://govstack.gitbook.io/implementation-playbook/govstack-implementation-playbook/3-terminology

Terminology to be gathered and created during the update of cross-cutting requirements.