Reply to: Introduction to use cases

[lightng]

Getting the hang of this now.

I've drawn a boundary box labelled CUK. Outside I've got a stickman with the role description "Spammer". I've put an oval use-case bubble in the boundary box and labelled it "Spam CUK". A straight line between the stickman and the use-case bubble completes my diagram.

Wow, I now understand the bigger picture. This use-case stuff is truly amazing!

[cojak]

Here's another good website to giving examples

[cojak]

Well, godd luck to him provided he doesn't expect me to put my hand in my pocket...

[jmo21]

didn't Alex post a while back asking what people thought of this idea about a business analysis blog of some sort?

Edit: here it is: http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...lyst-site.html

[Rookie]

I'd agree wth gonzo an almost all points

Like most tools, use cases have a value but only whe used in the right circumstances and in the right way.

As gonzo says, they are good for systems where there is a lot of user interaction. Otherwise, don't use them.
They strike a balance between the highly structured approach that a designer/developer needs and the informal approach to which the business user tends to respond best.

They're also good for planning purposes - you can break a use case into scenarios and plan to deliver agreed scenarios in a particular release or iteration.

What's the alternative? Unwieldy functional specs - unsatisfactory for developers and business users.
I'd be curious to hear what others have used.

I'm not sure what is considered spam - I am promoting my website but you should only click on the link if you're interested in the content and it doesn't cost!!

As a parting shot, use cases should never be used in isolation - users respond better to prototypes and other more visual, less abstract approaches.
This is discussed more in Requirements gathering alongside use cases!!!

More blatent spamming! Why not click on my 'more spam' linky: http://www.spam.com/

[alex_papworth]

In my defence!

I'd agree wth gonzo an almost all points

Like most tools, use cases have a value but only whe used in the right circumstances and in the right way.

As gonzo says, they are good for systems where there is a lot of user interaction. Otherwise, don't use them.
They strike a balance between the highly structured approach that a designer/developer needs and the informal approach to which the business user tends to respond best.

They're also good for planning purposes - you can break a use case into scenarios and plan to deliver agreed scenarios in a particular release or iteration.

What's the alternative? Unwieldy functional specs - unsatisfactory for developers and business users.
I'd be curious to hear what others have used.

I'm not sure what is considered spam - I am promoting my website but you should only click on the link if you're interested in the content and it doesn't cost!!

As a parting shot, use cases should never be used in isolation - users respond better to prototypes and other more visual, less abstract approaches.
This is discussed more in Requirements gathering alongside use cases!!!

[pmeswani]

Almost forgot the most important bit.

Absolutely agree. I have no general desire to know anything about use cases. Use Case is something I did at University. I would like to leave it there if possible. If memory serves... it has something to do with UML?

[Gonzo]

Almost forgot the most important bit.

Please read Use cases - an Introduction as a primer for use cases for first timers or those who want to know something about the history and the original purpose for use cases.

I have been modelling requirements using use cases for over ten years and thought it would be helpful to provide some articles introducing use cases.

[Svalbaard]

Use cases - pointless but clever sounding terminology for bland MBA types to throw around in wine bars or at parties to make themselves feel smart.

When the rest of us know that all it's just a rehash of how to do good requirements analysis.

Still, I'm sure a few authors have cashed in.

[Gonzo]

They suit some occasions better than others.

They are pretty good for capturing requirements for systems that have a lot of interaction with the user, for example when you are computerising a manual process. One advantage is that they also provide the test scripts for testing.

But they are not the be-all-and-end-all for all situations which is how some people treat them.

[Doggy Styles]

I rather like use cases.

[darmstadt]

Pain in the arse. Last project used use cases but no-one could exactly identify what one was and then user stories comes in to play and it just got stupid. Whatever hapened to the days when someone said we need such a such an application, someone designed it and then soemone wrote it? (Quite often the same person all the way through.)

[Unicorn]

Ah, it's an advert for suitcases ? Thanks.

[PRC1964]

I use cases all the time. I've even been know to use a trunk. Never a manbag though. That would be a step too far.

[Unicorn]

Could someone translate or am I being dumb ?