|
|
|
|
|
by agentultra
2363 days ago
|
|
On the other side I've had customers ask for things that are impossible or against best practices and their own interests. For example, password requirements. Many companies are not aware of the latest best practices and guidelines and request that we block browsers from generating or remembering passwords in password fields. Or they give us a list of draconian password requirements that are clearly debunked by the latest guidelines. Or they ask us to basically break the HTML spec. Like I tell my four year old son, I'd love to get a million dollars but I'm not going to get it because I stamp my feet and demand it. Trade-offs need to be made on both sides. I agree that an engineer that doesn't provide alternatives when a customer demand is not technically feasible should be corrected. However the customer should be prepared to choose from those alternatives or change their demands as well. The first step to success is shipping and the most common reason for software projects shipping late is a failure to start. I'm not against firing bad customers. It's much easier to ship without a contentious feature and figure out how to add it later than to delay shipping (for certain features within reason, of course -- please don't ship half-baked security libraries or aviation control software). |
|
I was specifically talking about situation where requirements are possible and not ambiguos. And where engineers starts "knowing" customer is wrong and keep knowing it despite it regularly turns out it was enginers lack of domain knowledge.
There is no trade off between these two situations.
I don't know what you mean by breaking html spec. Browsers keep it and we work either with it or around it?