RE: Mapping Specs to the Architecture

When the WSA WG was being formed this type of activity was a part of the
initial discussions.  We discussed the nature of drawing "boxes" around
pieces of the architecture and documenting the status of specifications
work relevant to those "boxes."  This could highlight areas where
specifications either do not exist or are weak and areas where this is a
depth of mature specifications.

 

Joel Munter, Intel

desk: 480.552.3076

cell:  602.790.0924

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]

Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 3:13 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Mapping Specs to the Architecture

 

I had a chat with TimBL about the WS Arch work in which he asked a very
interesting question.  He wanted to know whether we were producing a
diagram that would make clear what parts of the architecture currently
have specs in place, what parts have specs in progress and what parts
need specs but there is nothing in sight.  I don't think that this kind
of thing is explicitly a part of our requirements, and in fact I think
that we have not thought too much about this particular audience -- the
people that launch or coordinate the spec efforts as opposed to the spec
writers themselves -- but I think that the expectation is a pretty
reasonable one.

I made some really dumb response like, "Gee, got me.  I suspect that
it's a little early to see results like that but we may be doing things
that could go in that direction".  But now I wonder -- could specs be
mapped onto the spaghetti diagram that we have been working on?  If not,
does that indicate that some other view is needed?  It seems to me that
some specs go onto that diagram pretty naturally, but that some involved
with the "ilities" might not.  Or perhaps that is just because the
diagram is incomplete??