Simpson,
1. The logical conclusion is that this is not so simple as it's made out to be.
Depends on where you are comming from.
If you start with a clean sheet of paper, then you define what you want the system to do
and go through all the itinerary steps to arrive at an acceptable design within all the
constraints that are placed on doing the task. This is done in a way which utilizes good
engineering principles, techiniques, judgement and includes past / present / researched experience.
The task utilizes all the different disciplines involved in a respected and valued manner. In the end a
rationalized design is provided in terms of cost, quality and time (CQT).
CQT is related and requires sacrifice to improve the other.
2. I don't reacall finding any clear advice on exactly how to select a 'quality' component.
The suppliers of material components cover the gamut of required items. There is a lot of choice
to be had and the evaluation of all of them would be mind boggling. User experience of tried items
is invaluable and manny recomendations / suggestions satisfy a general need in the hobbiest arena.Consensus may never be had. We are here to offer suggestions for consideration and not make decisions for someone. In the end is falls back to oneself to make a decision.
3. Is there some way to be proactive in interpreting a spec, graph, or other perfomance
documentation?
Yes, and when given, most folks don't full understand it, or, will shy away because it's too technical. For even a simple item a book can be written and probably already exists.
All too often data and application must be related to the system and intended use.
4.What are the caveats to avoid?
Putting it all together and then asking others to fix it for you and challenging their experience.
RICH