Re: A Priori Information (Was Snapshot of Web Services Glossary)

* Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com> [2003-02-24 10:41-0600]
> OK, we've kicked this term around enough so that it seems pretty clear
> that it is not going to be a quick kill to get consensus on a general
> definition, and I think David is absolutely correct: we need to address
> the issue itself, but not necessarily this term as a general concept.
> 
> So I suggest something along the following resolution to resolve the
> issue:
> 
> "The WG is not currently using the term "a priori information" in the
> reference architecture, so we do not feel a need to come to an agreement
> about the meaning of the term in general.  In the specific context in
> which it is used in the group charter, we understand it to mean "prior
> information".  We interpret this as a requirement that the architecture
> support late binding."

I am happy to put such a statement in the glossary. However, I
think that we should add something (or a placeholder) in the WSA
to talk about it. Maybe just to say what you are saying here.

However, I was wondering if we had actually a requirement about this
before saying "We interpret this as a requirement that the
architecture support late binding."

AC004 and AR004.2 read[1]:

|   AC004
|          does not preclude any programming model.
|          
|          + AR004.2 is comprised of loosely-coupled components and their
|            interrelationships.

I think that this is the one that has been discussed when there were
late binding discussions, but I don't think that it explicitely calls
out for it. Maybe we are missing a requirement then.

Or have I missed something in the requirements document?

Regards,

Hugo

  1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-wsa-reqs-20021114#AC004
-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 10:34:22 UTC