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

RE: [RTF] AC019 proposal to WSA WG

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 21:25:41 -0700
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E7C94D6@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "'Hao He'" <Hao.He@thomson.com.au>, "'Joseph Hui'" <Joseph.Hui@exodus.net>, "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>
cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org

Another +1.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hao He [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:46 PM
To: 'Joseph Hui'; Mark Baker; Damodaran, Suresh
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: [RTF] AC019 proposal to WSA WG


+1

Hao

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Hui [mailto:Joseph.Hui@exodus.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 12:43 PM
To: Mark Baker; Damodaran, Suresh
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: [RTF] AC019 proposal to WSA WG



Mark,

IMHO "reliable messagin (RM)," which is a widely used term, would do just
fine in the context given by Suresh.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:32 PM
> To: Damodaran, Suresh
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [RTF] AC019 proposal to WSA WG
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 08:07:04PM -0500, Damodaran, Suresh wrote:
> > Therefore, I do not see how changing "reliable messaging"
> to "reliable
> > computing"
> > improves the clarity. 
> 
> It wasn't intended to improve the clarity, it was intended to resolve 
> my belief that it is inappropriate for us to prescribe a specific 
> solution (such as reliable messaging) until we know the form that our 
> architecture will take.

RM is a term for a solution class, which is generic.
It's not a solution instance, which is specific.
Well, let's say for the moment it's as specific as the
term "cold medicine," which is a class, of which the
instances are: Tylenol, Contac, Jack Daniels, ... ;-)

Thus I see nothing wrong in our calling out a solution class. For instance,
system architects and protocol designers often call out for "reliable
transport" -- a class, as opposed to "TCP," an instance.  What's so special
about us that we have to knock ourselves out just to tiptoe around the RM
term?

> > Besides, "reliable computing" includes defining semantics of what is 
> > "reliable" computing. Refer to "behavior equivalence definition" 
> > thread discussions.
> 
> How about "reliable coordination of tasks" then?

That would be like renaming "cold medicine" to
"temporary relief for symptomatic stress," wouldn't it?
There better be darned good reason to switch from a
term to a phrase.  Somehow I've failed to see one here.

Cheers,

Joe Hui
Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service
=============================================
> 
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
> http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 00:26:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:01 GMT