OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

saf message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: review of Educational powerpoint

A few comments about the powerpoint.

I haven’t made any changes yet, as wanted to get folks input first.


1.       The first six slides do not clearly differentiate SAF from (yet another) CEP/Workflow.  The remaining slides, however, do a great job of differentiation.  Would recommend starting with slide 7, and moving the first 6 slides to the back of the deck.

2.       Slide 3 explains Symptom, Syndrome, Protocol, and Prescription.  It would be good to articulate that these entities are primarily envelopes for events, rules, action templates, and actions.  Thus we aren’t re-inventing BPEL, RuleML, etc.

3.       The “cartoon” slides are great, but missing two important pieces:

a.       The provider is likely to provide Symptoms (and thus contribute Syndromes to the catalog).  The Symptoms would generally describe service notifications such as “service will be out for maintenance”, or “unplanned outage”, etc.

b.      There is no discussion of composability.  The consumer would typically compose Syndromes from other syndromes (contributed from various sources) and also “glue” Syndromes to Protocols.  In my opinion – composability of diverse syndromes/protocols is the key differentiator for SAF.

4.       Getting nitpicky, but slide 23 is titled “Collaborations”, and I initially thought it was describing SAF catalog collaborations.



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]