Capoo

25 March

March 25, 20253 minutes

Meeting Minutes

Course: Software Engineering Discipline and Practice COMSM0166 Date: March 25, 2025 Topic: Privacy Design Review and Coursework Task Planning Participants: All team members

1. Meeting Objectives

  1. Review and assess whether the Capoo game involves any user privacy concerns and whether it follows the Privacy by Design principles;
  2. Clarify coursework assessment requirements, including the report, video, and demo;
  3. Define remaining tasks, team responsibilities, and deadlines to ensure timely submission.

2. Privacy Protection Review (20 minutes)

Key Analysis Points:

  • Does the game collect any personally identifiable information (PII)?
    • The Capoo game does not involve user login or identity collection, so there is no data storage or privacy risk.
    • No need for data anonymization, encryption, or access control mechanisms.
  • Can the game function without collecting user information?
    • Yes. All core functions (e.g., level jumping, scoring mechanisms) are handled locally by the game logic or state machine.
    • The current version has no online components or persistent data storage.
  • Is there a need to apply Persona / Inform & Choice strategies?
    • Not applicable at this stage.

3. Report Structure and Key Points

Writing responsibilities for each section:

SectionWord CountKey Content Points
Introduction~250Description of the game, source of inspiration, and its uniqueness
Requirements~750Use case diagrams, user stories, early ideation process
Design~750System architecture, class diagrams, behavioral diagrams
Implementation~750Implementation details, highlighting three major development challenges
Evaluation~750One qualitative + one quantitative evaluation (e.g., SUS analysis), including testing approach
Process~750Team collaboration, tools used, team roles, reflection
Sustainability, Ethics, Accessibility~750Analysis based on Workshop 10: sustainability, ethics, accessibility
Conclusion~500Reflection on the project, lessons learned, and future directions
Contribution StatementTableClearly define each member’s contribution for grade moderation

Additional Marks:

  • Clear and visually appealing structure, appropriate use of diagrams and visuals (5%)
  • Well-organized and well-commented codebase (5%)

4. Video Production Guidelines

  • Length: 3–4 minutes
  • Must be uploaded and clearly linked in the GitHub repository
  • Content should include:
    • Game demo and explanation
    • Highlight two major development challenges
    • Overview of team collaboration
    • Future development plans

5. Final Demo Guidelines

Evaluation criteria:

  • Does the game run properly (technical performance + HCI experience)?
  • Does it reflect two technical challenges (e.g., level system, animation control)?
  • Is it fun and engaging? Are the mechanics clear and intuitive?
  • Note: Each assessor will spend approximately 5 minutes at your table, so prepare an efficient demo and be ready to answer questions.

6. Task Checklist

  1. Continue development and polish final version of the game
  2. Complete final user testing and evaluations (qualitative + quantitative)
  3. Finish writing all parts of the project report
  4. Record and edit the project video, upload and link it in the repo
  5. Schedule internal demo rehearsals and prepare your 5-minute presentation