Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
49 lines (36 loc) · 1.98 KB

Evaluation of a group presentation.md

File metadata and controls

49 lines (36 loc) · 1.98 KB

Evaluate the group presentation and documentation

Group name: COMESTU

Reviewers: Rosa Suominen, Susannan Karttunen, Henrik Reponen, Joonas Tuominen


Presentation review

Link to the slideset: Click here.

  • Did you get overall view of the product?
    Yes. It was clearly presented.

  • How was the slideset?
    The slideset was good and clear.

  • Was the presentation fluent? Body language? Language, quality of the speech?
    The presentation was fluent. Body language was good. You could have talked a bit more calmer. Sometimes the speech was a bit too rushed but mostly it was fluent and nice. The volume of the speech was loud enough.

  • Additional notes and comments
    Very good mock-ups. The idea of the application is good

Document review

Link to the documentation: Click here.

Review the following parts of the documentation.
For each section / part, describe the following:

  • Is all the content there?
  • What was bad in the specific part, how it could be improved?
  • What was good in the specific part?

Parts to review:

  1. introduction (=first section) + project management (=last section)
    Very thorough introduction, maybe even too thorough.
  2. use cases
    Good user definitions and use case diagram. Well thought scenarios that could happen. Flowchart could've had a nicer structure. A little overwhelming as is.
  3. system overview
    Too many modules, not all high level main modules. The ones listed are well explained.
  4. requirements, functional & non-functional
    Functional requirements take into consideration everything possible. More thought into non-functional requirements.
  5. user interface
    Very nice interface sketches. The map doesn't show up very well from the dark background