Re: D-AC0505 through D-AC0508.....

Yah, I like it too, but I agree with Oisin's 2nd point about "creating"
being a more important consideration than "describing".  Perhaps we
could say "avoid redundancies when creating and describing ..."?

Oisin's first point is true too, but it's not as
motherhood-and-apple-pie as I'd like it to be for removal, so I'd prefer
to keep it in.

MB

On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 02:29:24PM -0700, Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) wrote:
> 
> I think that Srinivas' rewording is far better than the starting point and
> is, in fact, good.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com] 
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:23 AM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Cc: wsawg public
> Subject: Re: D-AC0505 through D-AC0508.....
> 
> 
> 
> Please comment on the proposal, if there is no pushback,
> I'll be bringing this up on next week's call.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
> Srinivas Pandrangi wrote:
> > As per my action item from the last telcon, here is an attempt to
> > condense the four CSFs D-AC0505 through D-AC0508 into two CSFs.
> > 
> > D-AC0505 - The reference architecture will use the minimum number of
> > components required for a coherent and complete description of the web 
> > service architecture.
> > 
> > D-AC0506 - The reference architecture will avoid redundancies when
> > describing relationships between components.
> > 
> > I believe these CSFs capture the ideas in those that they replace.
> > 
> > --Srinivas
> > ole0.bmp
> > Srinivas Pandrangi
> > Ipedo Inc. [http://www.ipedo.com]
> > Ph: (650) 306 4002
> > Fax: (650) 306 4001
> > 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com