Discussion of article "How to create Requirements Specification for ordering an indicator" - page 6
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 another example TOR, an ending and some text in Acceptance and verification of the indicator
I added a screenshot to it, and also added to the section The first and main rule - communicate with the help of pictures and a video run-through on the correct insertion of riunks
And of course, drawings should be inserted directly into the text of the message, not attached as a file. Many developers simply won't download your file to view it, and so may misunderstand the assignment or simply skip it.
Take a look at how you can use the editor to design your TOR:
I myself really don't like it when a drawing is attached to a file, but what do freelancers think? Are they just used to it?
And still waiting for an example for the 3rd TOR. Maybe someone will give it to me. In principle, I searched in the works, found one, for example - https://www.mql5.com/en/job/76298.
Added a screenshot to it, and also added a run through on the First and foremost rule - communicate using pictures and a video run through on proper insertion of riunts
God forbid...
God forbid.
what are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
The drawings. There's no way to understand a drawing. There has to be, first and foremost, criteria (e.g. this is bigger than that, this is blue/red/white, this crossed - put an arrow to buy. And if another bar is indicated - bingo).
There are also customers who mark tops, troughs, dvergences on drawings as "they see it" and make the programmer "as in my head". If the TOR on drawings - a complete bacchanalia will be, you can immediately refuse such a TOR.
And why should the customer demand to insert the picture correctly? This is such a small thing that is not worth the time to discuss. People would learn to express themselves in the same terms, to understand that expressions such as "stochastic shows buy" are interpreted differently in absolutely different TOR.
------------------------------
Here was a perfect TK:
Buy signal:
Sell Signal:
Exit:
Example of two-stage limitation of the Expert Advisor work by time: 1) from 10-00 to 16-00 (Customisable parameter with the possibility of disabling).
2) from 18-00 to 24-00 (Customisable parameter with the possibility of switching off).
Auto lot calculation % of free margin, all parameters should be customisable.
But he had a very strange picture.
Here TOR turns directly into a quest something like "find 5 differences" or "guess what was meant". And then how to solve disputes if the customer did not express it verbally? The counsellor's work doesn't match the picture?
Here you can try to guess why there is a signal skip. The criterion here is quite clear.
(In this order, everything was agreed, the customer is generally good).
That was the perfect TOR:
But it had a very strange picture.
Then the TOR turns directly into a quest something like "find 5 differences" or "guess what was meant". And then how to solve disputes if the customer did not express it verbally? Counsellor's work does not correspond to the picture?
Here you can try to guess why there is a signal skip. The criterion here is quite clear.
(In this order everything was coordinated, the customer is good).
I think it's the customer's problem if he can't put a consistent illustration of his text in his own TOR.
"You can't prove anything with a negative example, only disprove it (sometimes)"
No instruction will help here. As in the anecdote - "your children are beautiful".
Galina Bobro:
And why should the customer be required to insert the picture correctly? This is such a small thing that it is not worth the time to discuss it at all. People should learn to express themselves in the same terms, to understand that expressions like "stochastic shows buy" are interpreted differently in different TORs.
If a person has not mastered simple communication techniques - it's his/her problem, I agree. Inserting a picture/code in the right place and correctly is also some kind of hygiene and culture. I write tips on how to make mutual understanding between two parties in Freelance the most simple, not requiring extra time for auxiliary procedures - download/open/look/close. Forgot something or need to clarify - again "download/open/look/close"
Do you like it? And it is also annoying when pictures are sent in WOrd or PDF format.
I think it's the customer's problem if he can't put a consistent illustration of his text in his own TOR.
Not really, he either gets what he wants or not, and I still have to work and negative feedback nothing.
Yes such almost half and most of the adequate, but only inattentive. That's why I say that in the first place should all spell out, express themselves in terms of conditions, and then already pictures, but without them you can even do without. If you put in the first place pictures, then customers in general may think that you do not need to explain themselves or you can even do something.
I understand your concern, I will correct the text a little in the evening. But you realise that this will help only adequate, as you say. And the other category will use an arschin to write - they will mould it in their own way.
Published - https://www.mql5.com/en/articles/4304
Thank you all for participating
Published - https://www.mql5.com/en/articles/4304
Thank you all for participating
The article is certainly huge, and there doesn't seem to be much to truncate.
What's missing is the formatting of the text - it's all bunched up. Important points would be better marked with a marker.
And make minor edits:
In general - ok!