TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Ever see this word used this way? From:Sandy Harris <sharris -at- dkl -dot- com> To:TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 09 Dec 1999 15:35:04 -0500
John Posada wrote:
>
> I'm reading a document (System Design Specification)
> that I'm updating and I came across this sentence:
>
> "The processes described in the FRS* must be
> decomposed into software products, which run on the
> target hardware."
>
> Aside from some issues I have with the general
> wording, anyone ever see the word "decomposed" used
> this way?
I've certainly seen "decompose" used to describe the
stage of the software design process where you derive
module and interface specs from a higher-level spec.
My question wouldn't be about wording, but about the
notion that "processes" can be decomposed into "software
products". I suspect there might be a dangerous fallacy
lurking underneath the writer's assumptions.
