Thanks bab (is that right?) for your response. You correctly highlight the significance of design and refactoring in the Test Driven Development (TDD) process. I appreciate your thoughts on the QA's role in defining and automating the acceptance criteria, emphasizing how this ensures business requirements are met.

While we are aligned on these aspects, my original article aimed to adopt a broader perspective on TDD, focusing on its strategic application in ensuring communication and alignment among all roles in a project. I believe this wider approach, similar to what the pioneers of TDD have created over time, can lead to more effective project development.

You might be familiar with Behavior-Driven Development (BDD), a flavor of TDD created by Dan North to teach TDD. It uses 'examples' to align teams. But, as you pointed out, these are not the code of the test, because later, the code is created in the red-green-refactor cycle. But now we can have a broader image of the full intention. This aligns with your point on having customer tests written or outlined before the development process begins.

I appreciate your contribution, including the excellent wordplay "Three Development Desires". Just wondering where next talks will drive us.

Thanks!