Re: Artifacts in Requesters -- Simple Conventions for Diagrams

David,

I did see this, but did not see any other commentary on the list. Not 
being a ppt wizard, I 
chose to defer this change. I'm not saying that the suggestion is without 
merit,
just that I had a limited amount of bandwidth and chose to focus on 
getting as
many of the editorial comments as I could incorporated into the prose. We 
can
always work on improving the graphics for the next round (volunteers? I 
have the
ppt sources).

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624



David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
10/31/2002 05:39 PM
Please respond to "David Booth"


To
www-wsa-comments@w3.org
cc
Heather Kreger/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS
bcc

Subject
Re: Artifacts in Requesters -- Simple Conventions for Diagrams



Chris,

Since I didn't see any response to the suggestion I made on Oct 21 to 
clarify the diagrams, (see 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Oct/0306.html ), I 
would like to reiterate that I think it's important to draw artifacts / 
documents differently from actors / agents / roles.  There's a big 
difference between an artifact and an actor (an artifact is a piece of 
data, whereas an actor is something that can perform actions), and that 
difference is muddied if they look similar in the diagrams.  In 
particular, 
the diagrams currently use ovals for both a "Service" (which is an actor / 

agent / role, depending on your terminology), and a "Service Description" 
(which is an artifact / document, depending on your terminology).

This isn't a show stopper if there isn't time to fix it right now, but I 
think it is important to fix when possible.  There is more explanation at: 

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/10/diagram_conventions_clean.htm

Thanks

-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273