Re: [soa-rm] Definitions

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

Don:

Please don't let this discourage you from continuing this work.  It is 
going to be valuable to this TC to develop a common set of references.  
We just have to ensure that they are in alignment with consensus in the TC.

In general, we should not define terms where there is no ambiguity.  It 
makes little sense to make a glossary and add definitions for 
everything, just areas where during the course of our work, we find 
there are ambiguities surrounding the use of a specific term.  For 
example, defining architecture is probably a good idea since there are 
multiple ways people think about architecture.  Defining XML, by 
contrast, is not a good idea since we all pretty much agree it means the 
W3C XML version 1.0 spec.  Adding a definition for "Schema" may be 
questionable yet good if we use the word to infer W3C Schema, DTD, Relax 
NG and any other metadata format since most people may assume we mean 
W3C Schema by default.

Duane


-- 
***********
Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources  - http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html
***********