The CPC’s Multiple Media proposal goes far beyond merely eliminating similar outputs delivered online versus printed. The CPC proposal can bundle multiple distinct inputs, outputs or enquiries into a single elementary process even when there are obvious distinguishing characteristics. This means that current EI, EO and EQs that are counted as separate logical functions under IFPUG 4.2 rules, would now be counted as a single function only.
This section seeks to show the adverse impact of the “Multiple Media” interpretation on the effective use of Function Point Analysis.
The argument about whether or not the “medium” constitutes a technical requirement or not, in the end just comes down to opinion.
The outcome of this new interpretation is a very narrow view of functionality which appears to have very little useful application. It is this bad outcome which should be guiding the method and causing the interpretation to be re-visited.
The following example scenarios seek to show that this narrow view of functionality is not useful. It does not deliver a useful outcome. It does not make the technique more useful for its intended purposes. In fact, it makes the technique markedly less useful.
The following two scenarios illustrate the impact of new “multiple media” interpretation on the usefulness of the technique.
At a point in time, two Elementary Processes may exhibit
the same DETs, access the same FTRs and share the same processing rules but be
differentiated by a distinct business requirement for the media used for
information presentation or a distinct business requirement for a presentation
platform.
Since the user will see these two Elementary Processes as representing two independent software deliverables, each will have its own evolutionary path. Changes will be made to one but not to the other. One will be decommissioned, one will remain. Attempting to treat them as a single item is meaningless and irrelevant.