7    SCOPE   is more cost effective  when recording counts

SCOPE was designed by function point counters for function point counters, to make counting fast, effective, auditable and well documented.  The key component to this objective was to have all features in SCOPE performed on the single main screen avoiding the time wasting tasks of navigating through overlapping multiple windows.

SCOPE displays all four count components (Processes, Data, Notes and Attributes)  as Hierarchy trees such that the majority of any tree’s nodes  are visible AND readable on a single screen, thus avoiding time wasted in scrolling vertically and horizontally to understand a functional breakdown.

The split screen display allows linking of all count components to be completed with a single mouse click without changing windows.

Data, Notes and Attributes can all be hierarchically modelled and catalogued into folders to facilitate locating them and understanding their relationships when linking to a Logical Data Group or Note to a Process.  All branches within any tree can be automatically sorted in a sequence of the user’s choice.

SCOPE has an MS Windows standard ‘search and replace’ function enabling quick up and down searches to find any text in the name or description of any count component (Process, Data, Note or Attribute)

SCOPE allows the counter freedom to use meaningful names and descriptions that best describes any of the count components and always displays the full name without truncation.

SCOPE provides further flexibility for ease of searching and linking by allowing the user to flip the dominant components from the left hand or right hand tree.  I.e. unlike FPW it is not driven from a fixed single directional left to right ‘transaction tree' view.  You can put the focus of the main window on any one of the Process, Data, Notes or Attribute Trees and then drive the count and the links from that view for ease of linking, filtering and reporting. 

Comparison to FPW

•       FPW’s circa 1990 user interface forces the counter  through multiple overlaying windows just to complete a simple function such as linking a process to a new datagroup, over the course of a large count this can add up to 30 %  more effort and cost for a count

•       FPW limits all text fields to 8, 20 or 32 characters. Longer names are truncated in the display boxes. Counters waste valuable time compacting and truncating the specification names used by the business to ‘fit’ them within space constrained by FPW’s pre-sized boxes

•       FPW keeps, stores and displays all count components other than processes as a flat list. The order and sequence of the displayed lists cannot be customised, nor can the components be grouped and catalogued for ease of review and maintenance of the counts

•       FPW drives everything from the Transaction hierarchy and does not cater for decomposing Data into RETs and DETs thus making the auditing, maintenance, and managing of the Files much more complex and time consuming

•       FPW does not allow the user put the name and description for processes, thus limiting the capability to describe and document it for ease of maintenance