mreekie
commented
4 years ago At today's Advisory Board meeting this topic came up. Mercé, Danny, Tania, and Erik raised and discussed questions around where the exploratory testing we're currently doing fits into the bigger picture; Schedule, dependencies, input. I've tried to capture the jist of the dialogue here so we can continue it.
I shared that at the big picture level we are still in Discovery mode on the OOD infrastructure We keep discovering more about the OOD architecture and as Danny put it, that helps us figure out the technical guard-rails that we will need to move within.
I sensed concern that potentially the whole effort would blindly follow the design direction that Evan has prototyped. The answer is that it might or it might not. Evan is going to be out for 6 weeks starting at some point in mid-July. I pointed out that pause in work will coincide with the team becoming better focused on the UX side of the equation and the output from our user interviews and data analysis could take the effort in a different direction. I also stressed that Evan is exploring the server architecture with his exploratory prototyping and that is contributing to our understanding of those guardrails.
I repeated the commitment today at the meeting that as of Monday July 6th the team would have read chapters 1-5 in the UX text so that we are all on the same page and that we are going to start driving everything in that context. I've told the team that it will be a subset 2-3 people who will commit to acting in the role of designers though the rest of the team can sit in and we all need to be able to understand the design philosophy and language that Tania is directing us with.
Mercé and Tania pointed out using the Viable, Possible, and desirable Venn diagram, that the Viable Circle seems to be missing from what she is hearing. The group agreed that the week after next we would dedicate the Advisory Board Meeting to a discussion of the Business objectives. This timing may work well. It sounds like we may be getting close to agreement on the Joint Objectives and could possibly have a final approval in two weeks. Mercé offered to make a set of slides for the meeting to frame the discussion with.
More details: This is where the project team is at today with respect to the OOD discovery.
- Ethan and Evan are working on this and have been talking with Raminder and Francesco as they go.
- Ethan has figured the basics of reproducing the FAS RC deployment process for their OOD instances.
- They have figured out what can be manipulated through configuration files. Francesco has offered that he can integrate this into a deployment if we'd like. Initially we were anxious to do this but now we're holding back as we have new new information.
- FAS RC is rolling out the OOD version 1.7 in July. This is the first version with the OOD "simplified interface". They are going to be deploying 2.0 later in the summer or early in the fall if I heard right.
- Evan has been working on a prototype, exploring what is possible if we were able to use a modern UI programming framework instead of the dated framework in use by the OOD interface.
- Ethan and Evan have been peeling the OOD architecture apart, and exploring what-ifs.
- Ethan figured out that we may be able to run a second set of web pages from the same server with a different URL.
- Evan figured out how the OOD server exchanges information with it's clients.
- Both investigation directions have as an objective to understand more about what is technically possible when it comes to interacting with the OOD instance.
Issues on the project board related to this:
From the description: "Users will interact with Cannon via an IQSS branded dashboard"
When? What is the timeframe for this as a milestone?
Will requirements link to Details Link?
How does the process to define this effort (what has been done and what is planned) get captured/connected to this?
Based on the way these items are framed, I suggest that these pages include definitions of done as part of their existence. If we don't have a definition of done for each, then I would consider that it is not yet a thing that is defined enough to move forward.