[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [Bug 162] New: Use of term implementation of a Coordination Service
http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=162 Summary: Use of term “implementation of a Coordination Service” Product: WS-CF Version: 1.0 Platform: PC URL: http://www.choreology.com/external/ws- cf.choreology_comments.htm#CHCF-4 OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Text and diagrams AssignedTo: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org ReportedBy: tony.fletcher@choreology.com QAContact: mark.little@arjuna.com Where: 2 3) (page 9, para 3) Comment: The term “implementation” in a spec such as this normally means a particular software incarnation; for a protocol spec. “implementation” is typically a unit of interoperability. Thus an implementation of a StockQuote web service (for example) would normally refer to just the service. But the term “implementation of a Coordination Service” here seems to mean a protocol definition that builds on the coordination framework, and which will itself need to be implemented in software (of Participants, at least) The term “Coordination Service” itself is sometimes used to mean the general pattern (c.f “interface”) and sometimes a particular (c.f. object implementing an interface), through out the document. Suggestion: The term "referencing specification" can be re-used from ws-context, now referring to a specification that builds on WS-CF but is not the entire application protocol. There are other uses of “implementation” in this sense. These should be checked. Some of the more confusing cases have been identified in subsequent issues. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]