[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsdm] MUWS Comments part 2
William, My comments on part 2. Most of them are typos or cosmetic changes. However, I think state and status capabilities need more work. 3.2.4. I don’t understand what you’re suggesting here? We have a capability that has no properties in it? What about the 2 that you just defined – state and statetransition? I agree that the state values should be defined by the managed resource owner. But how would the manager know where to go to get the state information if it doesn’t know how to ask for it? 3.3.1. I disagree with the language that the operational status is "independent of the specific state model used". I think it would be dependent but it is not a direct mapping. Cheers, H. -- Zhili Zhang wrote:
|
wd-wsdm-muws-part2-1.0-20041126.doc
begin:vcard fn:Homayoun Pourheidari n:Pourheidari;Homayoun org:WebLogic Integration adr;dom:;;2315 North First St.;San Jose;CA;95131 email;internet:homayoun@bea.com tel;work:+1 408.570.8175 version:2.1 end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]