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

RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"

From: <michael.mahan@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:23:19 -0400
Message-ID: <5C76D29CD0FA3143896D08BB1743296AB89BC4@bsebe001.americas.nokia.com>
To: <dmh@contivo.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

When adding p2p into the triangle, it overloaded the 
diagram because there was now more than one logical 
UC/Scenario.  Hence we yanked it into its own diagram. 
So I think that UC/Scenario is another property of the 
view, like roles, actions, and artifacts.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: ext Dave Hollander [mailto:dmh@contivo.com]
>Sent: September 27, 2002 05:00 PM
>To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
>Subject: RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"
>I still have faith in the role based triangle.
>I think much of the discussion should help 
>1) the editors know what assumptions readers may make
>	when seeing it. They must describe how roles
>	describe something and what roles are and are not.
>2) help us clearify some of the assumptions and fuzzy
>	thinking.
>For example, it seems to me we have three similar things:
> * Roles
>	the responsibilities of a class of things
> * Activities/Methods/Behavior (I don't know which verb is best)
>	what an instance of a role does
> * Artifacts
>	what is passed between instances of roles
>Each of these seem to be at a similar logical level.
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 19:23:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:59 UTC