Quality is defined as conformance to requirements, not as 'goodness' or 'elegance'.
Overall, I think that's the right approach. However, I've seen it most often as a conformance to static requirements, which pleases no one.
Ultimately quality means "The stakeholders are happy with the results of their investment."
In reply to Re^2: The dangers of perfection, and why you should stick with good enough
by chromatic
in thread The dangers of perfection, and why you should stick with good enough
by redhotpenguin
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |