loading...

re: Enough with the User Stories already! VIEW POST

FULL DISCUSSION
 

I don't mean to be a pedant but your gherkin scenarios should really be in a "given, when, then" format so that they follow the "arrange, act, assert" pattern. Also I would say that the feature/user story differs from gherkin scenarios in 1 fundamental way in that a user story or feature description is an explanation of WHAT the software should do whereas the scenarios and the steps are a description of HOW the software should behave, so I actually think they are both needed for different levels of abstraction

 

Thanks for the feedback @petergsimons . Yes, the 'Given' step has been replaced by 'When' due to bad pasting and I will change that, thanks for spotting it :)

As to your 2nd point, my assertion is simply that the Feature is a response to the question "How does the system need to behave in order to deliver a specific Capability?", i.e. a Feature describes behaviour. We outline that behaviour with a User Story or just plain prose. A User Story is just a generic description of the behaviour, in this I think we agree. My point is that a User Story is not the Feature. The Feature is the Feature. A Feature is an entity with many attributes, one of which is its description. The value of that attribute may be a User Story. Or it may not.

We then use Scenarios to examine this behaviour from different perspectives and in different contexts. A Scenario is still the same behaviour but viewed from different angles, a bit like turning a Rubik's cube in your hand and looking at its different sides. We are still describing the same cube but from different angles.

Hope this makes it clearer.

code of conduct - report abuse