Purpose of the design is to help stakeholders to understand author’s intent. To do this, having several view points are necessary. But what happens if an author tries to contain all knowledge in one view?
As I know, an engineers knows too much and it prohibit him to explain simply. She/He might think that the reason the other persons do not understand her/his documents is humble knowledge that readers have. It may be true, but too much information do not help readers to understand author’s point.
To achieve this, proper abstraction is necessary. Less important parts are recommended to be deleted to help reader’s understanding. Or proper hierarchical structure helps readers to understand.
When we think why this documents are existing, purpose of the document is to let others understand author’s point. By the reason, viewpoints are necessary.
When we consider a design in the system level, he/she wants to communicate to hardware and software team. As you know, One to One communication is better than multi to multi. System designer’s point of view, a viewpoint specific to software is easy to communicate than a viewpoint to all.
And many contents are contained in the design, readers don’t like to read because too much information is contained. They will lost their concentration and miss some contents. This situation will not be what the author want to.
Do not try just to contain all knowledge that you know in the design. Functional safety manager has to help engineers to write documents by guidelines, policies. In the functional safety standards, not only system design but also SW/HW design is required. To have balance between system, SW and HW design, structure and contents detail level needs to be considered. And proper viewpoints are required to guide engineers’ documentation.
As I emphasized in the previous post, scope of safety analysis depends on what engineers contain in the design document. If they omit some view points, safety analysis for the missed contents cannot be analyzed.
Related Article(in Kor)