The epistomology thread was nifty, but it departed from the issue
that seems more crucial: Are (test) documents useful or a waste of
time? When is a document a better "transport" than a conversation?
Never? Sometimes?

The XP hard line -- avoid documents, just talk -- is what I think
I'm hearing from Ron.

For me, this is an area where XP has overreacted. I definitely see a
place for (non-code) documents in an agile process. The essential
work of a sw development project is building knowledge, plus sharing
and distributing the knowledge effectively among all of the people
involved. (Subsequent to this, the application of that knowledge by
any individual is *relatively* straight-forward.) Documents work
because you can use them early (models that build knowledge),
because they persist (you're not crippled by your imperfect memory),
because they're efficient (you don't have to keep repeating the same
conversation with perfect fidelity), because they can capture
details (not just vague impressions), because they can be reviewed,
critiqued, and corrected (unlike your trembling thoughts), because
they remain (unlike you, you job-hopper!), etc.

I don't deny the real peril of over-documentation, which is why an
agile project ought to insist that all documents are purposeful,
i.e. contribute to the knowledge construction. Neither do I deny the
value of conversation in a small team nor do I claim that all
knowledge can or should be captured in a document.

---
Regards,
Kerry