Another shot at communicative and service

[Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com>]

Before people get a heart attack about more action types, I am not  
completely wedded to the concepts Capability Action and Message  
Action. However, what I am trying to do is complete the connection  
between a participant's actions in sending and receiving messages, and  
the actions that are viewed as being service actions.

In particular, Capability Action is supposed to refer to the actual  
invocation/activation of the capability behind a service.

The association class "participates" is not spectacularly named; but  
it is intended to refer to the qualified aggregation relationship  
between a joint action and the individual participants' roles in it.

This diagram does not define "counts as"; but uses it. If we really  
need to model it then I will have a go at doing that.

Note that one of the key merits of this model is that it allows us to  
talk separately about what is happening at the service level and at  
the communication level; and yet at the same time establish the  
connection. This is key because the natural conversations about  
messages etc. (e.g., MEP, end points, etc. etc. ) is disconnected from  
the natural conversation about services (policies, RWE, action  
sequences etc. etc.).

Frank

smime.p7s