OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsdm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [wsdm] Editorial comments

I too find the UML diagrams useful/helpful and would personally prefer that they not be removed.

Just as an alternative, I might mention that there are also tools, such as EMF, that can cleanly generate XML from UML and in fact some in my group have had good success on other standards groups using it specifically for keeping the two in sync.

John Gerken
Technical Team Leader
Emerging Technologies Toolkit Development
IBM Emerging Technologies Software Group

Mark Ellison <ellison@ieee.org>

10/12/2004 10:22 AM

"Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
Re: [wsdm] Editorial comments


Igor- if you are concerned about the XML getting out of synch with the UML.  Why don't you just generate the UML from the XML?


Mike Clements wrote:

It's easy for us to underestimate the value of the UML models since we already understand the spec. I find UML more intuitive and easier to read than XML.
It was only a few months ago when I was reading these specs for the first time. When I was doing that the 2 things that helped me the most in understanding it were the written text and the UML. The XML is an essential normative part of the spec, but it is virtually useless in gaining understanding. XML is intuitively readable only to robots and vulcans.
Pictures are useful. If UML is too detailed and expensive to keep up to date, let's replace it with some kind of non-normative block diagram. That way we get the intuitive advantages of pictures without the hassles of maintaining detailed and redundant UML.
Just my $0.02.
From: Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com]
Monday, October 11, 2004 1:13 PM
[wsdm] Editorial comments

I suggest that we remove all UML models which define the capabilities throughout MUWS and MOWS specs because
        1) it is hard to keep XML and UML syncronized
        2) the information in UML is redundant to the normative definitions of the XML
        3) the value of these models is not incredibly useful for understanding the specs
        4) it makes sense to focus on XML information definitions and exchanges which is what gives us interoperability

-- Igor Sedukhin .. ( igor.sedukhin@ca.com )
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]