[quote="jbohren, post:85, topic:6155"]
For instance, I dont even think that the aforementioned communities (academia and industry) are the *only* two classes of stakeholder that we care about or even that each of those classes has a unified set of requirements.
[/quote]
I agree. There are domain specific categories automotive, avionics, industrial, medical, military, etc. each having domain specific standards (from which requirements are derived from). However in every domain there are differences in requirements (risk based requirement estimation, product category based requirement estimation) as well. For e.g. medical devices there are country specific [device classes](
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_device#Classification) with varying requirements which may potentially deviate from country to country. One important point is to consider non-technical requirements like development process related requirements as well (e.g. traceability of requirements to production source code, traceability of production source code to test code, code review etc.). As far as I know many domain specific standards are based on IEC61508 (at least in Germany) and related risk based requirement and best practice determination. As these requirements may hav
e huge impact and can be hard/impossible to be implemented/"added" later it would be ideal to have at least one representative of each domain in the ROS2 TSC I guess.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/discussion-on-ros-to-ros2-transition-plan/6155/93) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)