Re: [wsdm] Groups - wd-wsdm-muws-0.5-20040329-with-tracking.zip uploaded

[Mark Ellison <ellison@ieee.org>]

Hi William,

Heather's choice of language will have precedence over my suggestions here.

I think the word "extend" is intended to mean "to be derived from".  
There is probably better language than "extend", or "to be derived 
from".  What's the UMLish-equivalent term?  "constrain" doesn't sound 
right to me.  Maybe "subtype"  but that term seems more programatic than 
architectural.

Regards,

Mark


Vambenepe, William N wrote:

>I replaced with the suggested wording. I am still waiting for someone to
>explain to me what it means to "extend a manageability property".
>Heather, I believe this was your wording. Can you clarify what this
>means?
> 
>William
> 
>
>	-----Original Message-----
>	From: Mark Ellison [mailto:ellison@ieee.org] 
>	Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 5:04 PM
>	To: Vambenepe, William N; wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
>	Subject: Re: [wsdm] Groups -
>wd-wsdm-muws-0.5-20040329-with-tracking.zip uploaded
>	
>	
>
>	line 390: suggested changes for clarity:
>
>	
>	Manageability capabilities define resource specific properties,
>operations and events.  Details of these manageability capabilities are
>exposed by the manageable resource.
>
>	
>
>	A manageable resource MAY also define new resource-specific
>manageability capabilities.
>	
>
>	A manageable resource SHOULD extend a MUWS manageability
>capability when defining a resource-specific manageability capability
>that uses similar semantics.  
>	
>
>	
>
>	A manageable resource is not required to extend a MUWS
>manageability capability when defining a  resource-specific
>manageability capability that uses conflicting semantics.
>
>
>
>
>  
>