W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Face-toface review draft of requirements document

From: Austin, Daniel <Austin.D@ic.grainger.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 09:39:57 -0600
Message-ID: <E0995D588DC3D211BB8D00805FFE353907358C40@ic.ic.grainger.com>
To: "'Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)'" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hi Roger,

	My current strategy for dealing with this problem has been to
literally tack on the prefix clause "...to develop." I did this for # 20 but
neglected to do it for # 17 & 18. Group: please consider #17 & 18 to be
goals for the architecture not for the group itself.

	At some point these will all need re-ordering, but doing it now will
cause much confusion. 

Regards,

D-

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:26 AM
> To: 'Austin, Daniel'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Face-toface review draft of requirements document
> 
> 
> D-AG0017 appears, because of the ordering of the numbers, 
> under the heading
> "In addition, the Working Group will also act to:".  The verb 
> that starts
> the sentence, however, refers to the previous heading, "To develop a
> standard reference architecture for web services that:".  
> Note that the
> tenses of the verbs are different, as well as the meaning in 
> context.  One
> refers to what the architecture is supposed to do, the other 
> to what the
> working group is supposed to do.
> 
> This happened because the number was assigned late in the game and the
> earlier numbers were already taken, not because of any 
> judgement as to the
> logic of the matter.
> 
> I'm not sure how to fix this.  Renumber?  Order 
> non-sequentially in number?
> Eliminate the numbers?  Bring the heading into the text so it 
> no longer
> starts, "... Provides" but includes the proper prefix?  
> Change the tense of
> the verb, and the meaning, so that it refers to the working 
> group rather
> than the architecture?
> 
> It seems to me that the last alternative is the least 
> desirable because the
> metrics refer to the architecture, not the group activities.
> 
> Does D-AG0018 also have the same problem?  It looks to me 
> like the metrics
> mostly have to do with aspects of the architecture, not 
> activities of the
> working group.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Austin, Daniel [mailto:Austin.D@ic.grainger.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 7:12 PM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Face-toface review draft of requirements document
> 
> 
> Gentlebeings,
> 
> 	Thanks to the valiant efforts of my co-editors, I've 
> uploaded yet
> another updated version of the requirements draft (editor's 
> copy). This
> version is the last that will be published prior to the 
> face-to-face meeting
> in San Jose. This version includes the most recent wording of 
> the draft
> goals as well as associated CSFs and proposed requirements. 
> 
> 	I've not edited all of the text proposed by champions for their
> goals. Nor have i modified the ordering or presentation 
> beyond trying to fit
> the text into the document in a reasonable fashion.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/wd-wsawg-reqs-04012002.html
> 
> 	Please send all comments to me and CC the mailing list as well. 
> 
> 	Thanks to Sharad and Abbie for all their hard work!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> D- 
> 
> **************************************************************
> *********
> Dr. Daniel Austin, Sr. Technical Architect 
> austin.d@ic.grainger.com (847)
> 793 5044
> Visit: http://www.grainger.com
> 
> "Sapere Aude!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2002 11:11:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:57 GMT