FWD: Karen Coulter's comments.

[nelson%bnlmcn.dnet@bnl.gov (Mitchell C. Nelson)]

In reply to two of Karen Coulter's remarks:

> One shortfall of the top-down approach is that it assumes that one
> knows what the final product must be from the start.  It tends to
> lead to large monolithic programs which become inflexible over time.
> I think Mitch's  doc is a great start at organizing the requirements
> and actually getting something down on paper, but I don't think the
> top-down approach translates well into  program development and
> prototyping.

 1) Karen is suggesting that it is not neccessary for the designer to
  understand what he/she is designing.

 2) I use a top-down approach, and we see that the result is not a
  monolithic program.  And, users seem to feel that the system is
  quite flexible.

 3) To generate a complicated system with a broad range of capabilities,
  it should be obvious and clear to anyone that this takes planning.

> Can 'the best' features of existing programs be pulled out to create 
> independent modules?  ....

  4) This is like something out of Ayn Rand's book 'The Fountain Head'.
   Its a suggestion that fails to appreciate or respect the value and
   integrity of a well designed and well executed work.


 M.C.N.