RE: [soa-rm-ra] Section 3.1 Rewrite

["Laskey, Ken" <klaskey@mitre.org>]

Rex,

Thanks for the quick turnaround on this.  It is much more to the point and more functional in motivating the reader in what to expect in the subsections.  The attached includes some wordsmithing but I don't believe anything substantive and nothing that I see as critical.

Ken

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Kenneth Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305              phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                                    fax:        703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508


-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:14 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org RA
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Section 3.1 Rewrite

Hi Everyone,

This is my first shot at rewriting Section 3.1. I have one main 
consideration that I wasn't sure about. Does Section 3.1 refer only to 
Subsections in 3.1, or does it also refer to Sections 3.2, 3.3, etc? I 
dealt only with issues in Section 3.1-3.1.4.1.

I deleted the example in the 3.1 because I thought it muddied rather 
than clarified issues when what is needed is to set the stage for the 
discussion of Actors, Action, Joint Action and Communication as Joint 
Action. It tended to get the reader engaged with explanatory details 
immediately and for me that was a distracting rather than clarifying.

However, in rereading the whole section, I felt strongly that the 
explanation of Service Action as a specific kind of Action and the 
Counts-As logical equivalence needs an example that we all agree shows 
these critical elements clearly.

Cheers,
Rex

-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670

Section3 1-Rewrite-RB-04-28-2010-kjl.doc