Keith,

While I am aware that RUP takes an iterative approach to the development lifecycle, perhaps I should have made myself clear that the criticisms that it emphasizes on "big requirements upfront" and "over-documentation" are not mine but observations found in the literature.

I quote here an article by Gary Evans as an example: "Structurally, RUP is similar to the waterfall approach: Do requirements first; then do analysis, design, implementation and testing (the RADIT cycle); finally, release the product..." (refer to http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/184414763)

Thanks.