Re: [soa-rm-ra] OMG Pro Use of Agents

[michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com]

Yes, Ken, this would work (for me)
- Michael

==========================================
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] OMG Pro Use of Agents

    * From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
    * To: michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com
    * Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:02:43 -0400

Michael,

I'd say you realize the functionality by using the capability.

Does this work?

Ken
=============================================
On Jul 24, 2008, at 5:49 PM, michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com wrote:

> I am not that clear on though like it as well:
>
> Service is the Agent that takes on the Intent of the Service Consumer to realize the Real World Effects of the underlying capabilities, realizing these effects in ways that are consistent with the policies and any other constraints (such as technical assumptions) as contained in the service description.
>
> In particular, is it always the case that the RWE belongs to the underlying capabilities, especially, if capabilities are not functions but resources (as we talked before), and cannot be realized without resources?
>
> Im, probably, missing the conclusion about relationship between functionality and capabilities. To me, it would be much simpler if capabilities would included *functionality* & *resources*; in this case the Real World Effects of the underlying capabilities becomes fully consistent statement in my view.
>
> - Michael