adopt to section (remove not fitting feature/component/stakeholder )

RolandJentschETAS · RolandJentschETAS · commit 189e7ffda5d1 · 2025-12-04T13:00:56.000+01:00
diff --git a/process/folder_templates/features/feature_name/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst b/process/folder_templates/features/feature_name/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist
         -
         -
       * - REQ_03_02
-        - For feature/component requirements: Is the *linkage to the parent requirement* correct?
+        - Is the *linkage to the parent requirement* correct?
         - Linkage to correct levels and ASIL attributes is checked automatically, but it needs checking if the child requirement implements (at least) a part of the parent requirement.
         -
         -
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist
         -
       * - REQ_07_02
         - Is the attribute *security* set correctly?
-        - For feature/component requirements this checklist item is supported by automated check: "Every requirement which satisfies a stakeholder requirement with security attribute set to YES inherits this". But the feature/component requirements/architecture may additionally also be subject to a :ref:`Software Security Analysis <security_analysis>`.
+        - For feature/component requirements this checklist item is supported by automated check: "Every requirement which satisfies a stakeholder requirement with security attribute set to YES inherits this". But the feature requirements/architecture may additionally also be subject to a :ref:`Software Security Analysis <security_analysis>`.
         -
         -
         -
@@ -143,12 +143,12 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist
         -
       * - REQ_09_01
         - For stakeholder requirements: Do those cover assumed safety mechanisms needed by the hardware and system?
-        - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature/component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
+        - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
         -
         -
         -
       * - REQ_09_02
-        - For feature/component requirements: Do the requirements defining a safety mechanism contain the error reaction leading to a safe state?
+        - Do the feature requirements defining a safety mechanism contain the error reaction leading to a safe state?
         - Alternatively to the safe state there could also be "repair" mechanisms. Also do not forget to consider REQ_05_01 for these.
         -
         -
diff --git a/process/folder_templates/modules/module_name/component_name/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst b/process/folder_templates/modules/module_name/component_name/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst
@@ -142,8 +142,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist
         -
         -
       * - REQ_09_01
-        - For stakeholder requirements: Do those cover assumed safety mechanisms needed by the hardware and system?
-        - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature/component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
+        - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
         -
         -
         -

Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist`
`100`	`100`	`-`
`101`	`101`	`-`
`102`	`102`	`* - REQ_03_02`
`103`		`- - For feature/component requirements: Is the linkage to the parent requirement correct?`
	`103`	`+ - Is the linkage to the parent requirement correct?`
`104`	`104`	`- Linkage to correct levels and ASIL attributes is checked automatically, but it needs checking if the child requirement implements (at least) a part of the parent requirement.`
`105`	`105`	`-`
`106`	`106`	`-`
`@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist`
`131`	`131`	`-`
`132`	`132`	`* - REQ_07_02`
`133`	`133`	`- Is the attribute security set correctly?`
`134`		- - For feature/component requirements this checklist item is supported by automated check: "Every requirement which satisfies a stakeholder requirement with security attribute set to YES inherits this". But the feature/component requirements/architecture may additionally also be subject to a :ref:`Software Security Analysis <security_analysis>`.
	`134`	+ - For feature/component requirements this checklist item is supported by automated check: "Every requirement which satisfies a stakeholder requirement with security attribute set to YES inherits this". But the feature requirements/architecture may additionally also be subject to a :ref:`Software Security Analysis <security_analysis>`.
`135`	`135`	`-`
`136`	`136`	`-`
`137`	`137`	`-`
`@@ -143,12 +143,12 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist`
`143`	`143`	`-`
`144`	`144`	`* - REQ_09_01`
`145`	`145`	`- For stakeholder requirements: Do those cover assumed safety mechanisms needed by the hardware and system?`
`146`		- - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature/component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
	`146`	+ - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
`147`	`147`	`-`
`148`	`148`	`-`
`149`	`149`	`-`
`150`	`150`	`* - REQ_09_02`
`151`		`- - For feature/component requirements: Do the requirements defining a safety mechanism contain the error reaction leading to a safe state?`
	`151`	`+ - Do the feature requirements defining a safety mechanism contain the error reaction leading to a safe state?`
`152`	`152`	`- Alternatively to the safe state there could also be "repair" mechanisms. Also do not forget to consider REQ_05_01 for these.`
`153`	`153`	`-`
`154`	`154`	`-`
Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -142,8 +142,7 @@ Requirement Inspection Checklist`
`142`	`142`	`-`
`143`	`143`	`-`
`144`	`144`	`* - REQ_09_01`
`145`		`- - For stakeholder requirements: Do those cover assumed safety mechanisms needed by the hardware and system?`
`146`		- - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas feature/component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
	`145`	+ - Note that stakeholder requirements covering safety mechanisms come from rationales, whereas component requirements are covering safety mechanisms coming from :need:`gd_chklst__safety_analysis`
`147`	`146`	`-`
`148`	`147`	`-`
`149`	`148`	`-`