Updated Section 4.3

["Jeffrey A. Estefan" <jeffrey.a.estefan@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Frank,

 

Attached is an updated version of Section 4.3.  This reflects some of my own minor updates upon re-reading the section as well as addressing the open issues levied against this section based on the Dec 5, 2007 issues list.

 

Note that I accepted ALL changes from your latest draft of the SOA-RA word document for this section and deleted all inline comments.  That way, you can better see my updates and my own comments.  I would suggest that you do the same for your "master blaster" version.  (For some reason, the version you send shows musical notes under the track changes.  At least on my machine.)

 

Here's a status of the open issues:

Issue 209:  Action to Ken to update SD Model (lines 1380 to 1383)

 

Issue ??? (line 191 in Dec 5, 2007 spreadsheet):  Action to Frank to update all figure captions

 

Issue 353:  Accepted and updated.

 

Issue 227:  Accepted and updated.

 

Issue 229:  Accepted and updated.

 

Issue 235:  Accepted and updated.

 

Also note that although I have not opened a new issue but will likely do so against the next working draft has to do with the MEPs we're modeling.  Please see my embedded comments.  In a nutshell, it's getting at the "apples and oranges" issue of modes of action, which we state to be joint action and event notification.  And the associated MEPs (currently) are request/response (for joint action mode) and event notification (for event notification mode).  Clearly, there is an apples/oranges problem with the latter and it's confusing not only to me but it will be to the reader.  My recommendation is to use pub/sub as the MEP as the more common MEP to model event notification.  The text would clearly state that it is not the only one.   I hope you see what I'm talking about.  I'd prefer to settle this prior to the release of WD 0.3 and without endless debate.  It is not resolved, I'll levy an issue against the section in WD 0.3.  (Gee, it seems like I'm working the Halls of Congress here!)

 

OK.  Off for the weekend.  The next model I am going to concentrate on is Security and Governance.  I'll start with the former since we've had limited input from the members and I'm going to engage the help of one of my security expert colleagues (if I can pin down some of his time!).  We've seemed to kill off everybody who takes a crack at the Governance model and therefore, I recommend you write it given the various input and suggested models we've all put forward.  Then we'll see how bad we can kill that approach.  What ever we do in this model, it must NOT BE too abstract.

 

Bye for now...

 

 - Jeff E., JPL

SOA-RA-4_3_Update-JAE_07Dec2007.doc