I need to introduce the 'counts-as' predicate/inference rule.
Counts-as is used in some systems of logic to help capture causal models. But counts-as is not causality.
P1 counts-as P2
can be roughly translated as
"whenever you see P1, it is as though you saw P2"
For example, "the traffic light is green" counts-as "permission to cross", and "ack" counts-as "I have received".
In message-based interaction: "successful execution of MEP 1234" counts-as "client wants to open a bank account"
More formally, it is a way of relating predicates in one system of logic/world domain to predicates in another. It is not the same thing as implies because you can cross logical systems using counts-as.
(For the logically curious, counts-as is closer to the interpretation function than implication.)
The bottom line: a communicative action (which is a joint action) counts-as an action against the service.
Frank
On Jun 4, 2008, at 6:29 PM, Rex Brooks wrote:
I think Message Exchange is a realization of Communicative Action. I would say that Message denotes Action. I would not include Event in this model unless there is a way to specify that an Event occurs upon the reception of a Message (which I don't think is possible in this diagram). For me, an Event only occurs in certain types of Message Exchange and may not require an exchange, although an "ack" would be a wise course so that the sender knows that the message has been received. Just my opinion. Also my opinion is that "conveys" should be taken to mean "transports" or "transmits."
Cheers,
Rex
At 1:31 PM -0700 6/4/08, Jeffrey A. Estefan wrote:
Folks,
Since many of you on the call this morning are security challenged by your corporate firewalls, I'm uploading this to our Kavi site instead.
This visual model is a first attempt to map from the higher level abstract model describing Communicative Action and its relationship to Interaction to a level of abstraction on par with the Realizing SOAs View in which we map these concepts to Message Exchange and Service Interaction, respectively. This model or a variant of it will need to be included in the Interacting with Services Model section of the RA. It's imperative that we come to some agreement on this. Michael has provided some models as well, which you can see on the Kavi site. They do not yet, however, reflect our discussions/clarifications today with Frank.
Here's how to "read" the visual model...
Communicative Action is a specialization of Joint Action. (Don't know if we need to reflect that here yet again. Perhaps.) Communicative Action conveys Action and Event. Interaction is composed of Communicative Action. Message Exchange is a specialization of Communicative Action while Service Interaction is a specialization of Interaction. Service Interaction realizes Message Exchange (or conversely, Message Exchange is realized by Service Interaction). [The note opens the question to you all on whether or not this association should be a composition or a realization. (Incidentally, the dashed line with the open arrow head denotes realization in the UML.)] Message Exchange is composed of one or more Messages. A Message is composed of Structure and Semantics, which are described in the Information Model. A Message is a medium of Service Interaction. A Message also represents (or denotes) Action and Event.
Appreciate your comments!
- Jeff
--
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
