I like the personas and journey features. In formal systems engineering, a common mistake (including for the 737MAX[1]) is failing to model system users, and t

I like the personas and journey features. In formal systems engineering, a common mistake (including for the 737MAX[1]) is failing to model system users, and treating system users as completely external and separate to what is being designed. I'd love to play with an Inform 7[2] like language for capturing "operational scenarios"[3] (systems engineering jargon for roughly a combination of "personas" and "journeys"). In many fields of systems engineering (e.g. aviation), vocabulary has to be tightly controlled and syntactically unambiguous language used. As is the case with Userdoc, an LLM could propose operational scenarios, but they'd need to be converted to a syntactically unambiguous language, and be vetted by humans. Of current approaches to formally capturing operational scenarios, and I don't think any of these do a particularly good job of it, I prefer Object Process Methodology[4] (text representation only) over SysMLv2[5] (again text representation only, and this is R&D/draft). I'd only mention SysMLv1 or UML use cases as something I'd forever avoid. [1] https://www.incose.org/docs/default-source/enchantment/210310-carson-perspectives-on-the-737max.pdf https://www.incose.org/docs/default-source/enchantment/21031... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inform#Inform_7_programming_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inform#Inform_7_programming_la... [3] https://sebokwiki.org/wiki/Operational_Scenario_(glossary) https://sebokwiki.org/wiki/Operational_Scenario_(glossary) [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_Process_Methodology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_Process_Methodology [5] https://github.com/Systems-Modeling/SysML-v2-Release/blob/master/doc/Intro%20to%20the%20SysML%20v2%20Language-Textual%20Notation.pdf https://github.com/Systems-Modeling/SysML-v2-Release/blob/ma...