(copy to editor, edit, hand in to appropriate asgns directory with
filename AUTHOR_by_REVIEWER.txt)

Specifications Author: Kevin Thomas
Project Title: The Forum
Reviewer: Colin Stebbins Gordon

Evaluate the elements below on a scale from 1-5.  Add comments after
each as needed.  Copy in any text from the specification to make
appropriate comments.  Address comments to the author of the
specification.

	1) description of the project (from requirements);
	5
	Good.

	2) system model diagram;
	4
	Do the content pages include the actual forum itself?  Is that why it
	connects to the DB?

	3) annotations describing each component of the system model;
	4
	Description of the content pages?  It seems like you're assuming it's
	obvious, but it's not.  What is contained in the content pages?  Static
	content, forums, both?  Presumably at least part of it is dynamic, since
	it calls the DB.

	4) user interface diagrams and descriptions;
	0
	Absent

	5) written description of the above;
	0
	Absent

	6) non-functional requirements (performance, testing,
		reliability, ease of use, portability, documentation,
		dependencies on other systems);
	4
	Define responsive.  Hopefully you want to test everything, but how do
	you intend to test these things? - even a vague outline of a strategy is
	helpful.

	7) updated requirements (with priorities, etc.);
	5
	Good, looks like a complete, well-ordered list, and all useful.  Though
	wasn't a forum part of this proposal earlier?

	8) any risky parts.
	5
	Good assessment of the crawler risks.  Frankly, I think you overestimate
	the maturity and rationality of many of the people who would take part
	in this - I strongly suspect that the community would have a hard time
	not succumbing to partisan mudslinging.

Other comments:
Writing parsers for possibly not-that-well-designed websites can be a real pain.

================================================================

Additional comments/changes after presentation: