Re: TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives

On Aug 26, 2004, at 11:28 PM, Chris Haynes wrote:

> I have classed this as a TECH-OMISSION because its a case of inserting/
> modifying  a requirement so that it matches the actual functionality 
> being
> specified; it closes a requirement-functionality gap which is what I 
> interpret
> the spirit of TECH-OMISSION  to be.
Can you need to be more explicit about the change you desire?  This 
helps with readability and tracking of the issues.
-andy