Discussion of article "How to create Requirements Specification for ordering an indicator" - page 4
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Added a section at the beginning
First and foremost rule - communicate through drawings and videos
Keep criticising and offering your thoughts please.
Added a section at the beginning
First and foremost rule - communicate through drawings and videos
Continue to criticise and offer your thoughts, please.
Note: formalising rules can only be done in words, until the author of the idea tries to do it himself, he will not understand the essence of the process he is involved in (drafting the TOR). Pictures and videos are useful, but they are auxiliary materials. You can trace the evolution of customers who start with pictures and the project for 4 strictly progressively move to the text. That's my point: don't exaggerate the importance of pictures
This is the text of the order:
I-LINEindicator
1 Working time-frameM5only
2 Searches on the current session
3 Stays on the history
4 Number of candlesticks participating in the search N(by default 3 )
Description of candlesticks participating in the search
A) The extremum of the candlestick which has one of the shadows missing is compared (the second shadow is required).
B) Extrema of the shadows have the same value.
C) The shadow of the compared candlesticks cannot be 0 points (i.e. ifHI=open or CLOSE such candlestick is not compared (I will explain on the screen).
Highlighting on the chart
A) Extrema of candlesticks involved in the search are selected graphically (point).
B) A line is drawn along the extrema.
An alert about the line appearance is issued
We had to look through a lot of explanatory pictures, agree on all the concepts (so that there were no disagreements) and by leading questions to make such a TOR (taking into account the previously agreed concepts and definitions):
And it came out like this:
I support - without formalisation in words (or explanations on pictures) it will be "guess what I meant".
I did not understand - to whom it was addressed and to what. That's the problem of understanding.
I didn't understand to whom it was addressed and to what. That's the problem with understanding.
к
Note: formalising rules can only be done in words, until the author of the idea tries to do it himself, he will not understand the essence of the process he is involved in (TOR drafting). Pictures and videos are useful, but they are auxiliary materials. You can trace the evolution of customers who start with pictures and the project for 4 strictly progressively move to the text. That's my point: don't exaggerate the importance of pictures
And who said that formalisation is forbidden. It's just that some people write so hard to understand that you can't understand it without a picture.
And explanations in pictures are also necessary, of course. How can you order an indicator without pictures?
And explanations in pictures are also needed, of course. How can you order an indicator without pictures?
You can, very much so, I can't remember the last time I analysed something by pictures. But you can't order without explanations.
I doubt that's the way to get mankind into heaven. Reinterpreting a classic:
Rashid, let me put in a couple of cents.
There are customers who send a detailed ToR on 60 pages in Word, which is just hard to cope with because of the smallest details, such as the colour of the value at such and such point of the screen. I always give examples from my practice, here is an example of insanity. A customer from Latvia sent me a list of input - variables and asked me to display them on the screen with the possibility of editing. There were about 400 variables in the list, 99% of which were responsible for colour, line width, well, in general, I, as a person striving for a real trading result, was bored with all this nonsense.
I asked, (and it was 2013, so no 8K monitors), how are you going to display Full HD 400 variables on the screen? The answer was cheerful - well, Lesha, you're a programmer, you know better, you're experienced)).
In short, then all these fantasies of the Estonian peasant were clearly morally sent to the moon (or to another remote place) I made him a normal working robot. Although he was not happy. I warned him that he would lose in maths on martin. He paid well and I read him the basics of statistics, convinced him that stupid martin is a drain. He laughed, said that he had started a blog in one Estonian brokerage centre advertising his strategy, gave links, like 10% per month for Estonians is wow! After 2-3 months, he lost his money, all his savings of about 45000 euros went down the drain.
Guess who was to blame? )))))
--------------------
Got a little bit distracted in my memories, got off topic.
And there are people who naively think that I have the properties of telepathy. And you don't need to describe everything clearly and step by step, it's enough to sketch out your thoughts in a tablet in a pub and throw it to Lesha Volchansky, he will switch on the magic crystal and will instantly unravel everything that is unclear to the Customer. No, some people really ask - you're a programmer, do what's best.
Yesterday was just such a case. In the ToR for the robot there is not a single word on important conditions, I did exactly according to the ToR.
Well, I have already got used to the fact that 90% of Customers cannot describe their day, what they did from morning till evening. When I was teaching programming, I had such a test. If a person cannot describe his day, he has nothing to do in programming. There's no way to compose a clear ToR. So I have long ago accepted the idea that we are not alchemists, we cannot turn the surrounding mass of customers into gold. Nuggets are rare. But we can at least do primary filtration.
--------------------
It will be a good article, good luck!
that's the problem.
none of them thinks in the logic of functions, formalisations and what is called for what. As they say, if grandma had a grandfather, she would be a grandfather....
The customer perceives the chart 100% visually. Even the concept of a buffer is a dark forest for them.
The customer looks at the chart and wants a line to be drawn here, this height, this width. Approaches and explanations are very specific
This is the base on which Rashid should stay. Do not even try to expand his horizons, because he will get loaded and will not do anything that you are trying to do from him, because he needs to revise his views on life, and this is a long time, and you need an indicator for yesterday.
---
It is necessary to leave the customer strictly within the framework of his concepts (which he has already invented himself when applying to freelancing).
And just not to the customer, but to the coder to give this template questionnaire, according to which he will ask the customer for data on items and write them according to your standard.
And anything beyond that is pure communication, which (unlike writing trade experts) cannot be formalised in any way.
+100
Trying to change/teach/make the customer think is a utopian idea.
If he doesn't have a clear idea of what he wants to get before placing an order, no article (neither short, nor detailed, nor in video format) will make him understand the issue in detail. And if he already understands what he wants, then there are no difficulties with the presentation (including illustrations where they are necessary).
Everything else falls on the programmer's shoulders and is included in the cost of the work. With experience we manage to recognise inadequates quickly, literally by a few lines. And bad orders almost never happen.
The article will remain without the audience planned for it (but perhaps it will interest other inquisitive minds).