Re: [wsdm] F2F agenda item

[David E Cox <decox@us.ibm.com>]

Hi Homayoun,

  The way I read #1, the specific
combination or set of properties, operations, and notifications would be
a capability and would presumably have a name.  I think that the individual
properties, operations, and notifications can certainly be used in other
combinations to create different capabilities with different names.

  So, I don't think #1 means that
capabilities have to be mutually exclusive.  I also don't think #1
prevents one from combining capabilities into "composite" capabilities
or from "extending" a capability by adding new properties/operations/notifications
to create a more specific capability.

  I personally like #1; I think
it gives some structure to the whole mess!  When you refer to a capability
by name, you know what is in it.  We can still create the concept
of categorization described in #2, but it should be called something other
than "capability".  How about "capability category"?
 
Regards,
David E Cox

Homayoun Pourheidari <homayounp@gmail.com>

06/27/2005 04:11 AM

Please respond to
Homayoun Pourheidari

To	"Murray, Bryan P." <bryan.murray@hp.com>
cc	wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject	Re: [wsdm] F2F agenda item

+1 for the second choice.

As I recall, there were many use cases where a property or an
operation can belong to different management capabilities that one may
define.  Of course, you can go out of your way to define "capability"
categories that are mutually exclusive.  But I believe that is not
how
most people would relate to manageability information.

A wsdm capability should be considered a meta data that can be
attached to various components of manageability information to form a
category that provides a meaningful manageability semantic.

Cheers,
H.
--

On 6/25/05, Murray, Bryan P. <bryan.murray@hp.com> wrote:
> I had an internal discussion about WSDM capabilities today that makes
me
> wonder if all of the WSDM TC understand capabilities in the same way.
> Heather could you add an agenda item to talk briefly about capabilities
> during the f2f.
> 
> As a teaser, the 2 ways of looking at capabilities are:
> 
> 1) A capability is a set of properties, operations, and notifications
> described by WSDL/schema. Once defined, the capability has a fixed
set
> of properties, operations, and notifications - it is like a portType,
> forever constant.
> 
> 2) A capability is a means of categorization. Capabilities are defined
> independent of properties, operations, notifications. Any property,
> operation, notification can be assigned to zero or more capabilities
to
> show that they have something to do with that category of functionality.
> A capability has nothing to do with a portType and new properties
can
> claim they are associated with an existing capability.
> 
> Bryan
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your
TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php