W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

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

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 09:37:21 -0600
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E01624ACA@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>
cc: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org

Well, the suggestion was NOT to put anything in the glossary for this
term and to use the verbiage below as a response to the issue.

I'm not sure if we have anything explicit in the requirements about
supporting late binding, but it seems to me that a number of people on
the WG consider this important and that this was the sense of the
statement in the charter.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hugo Haas [mailto:hugo@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:34 AM
To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
Cc: David Booth; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: 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 10:38:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT