I'm not entirely sure, either, although this is consistent with the intention of one of the original diagrams I produced (before the "triangle" diagrams) -- as attached.
I know this isn't perfect, and may not be what we Martin was referring to when he said we needed a "stack" diagram, but maybe we could review this again and think about improving it toward becoming this type of diagram (which by the way I agree we should have, if that wasn't clear before).
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Champion, Mike
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:26 PM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mapping Specs to the Architecture
-----Original Message-----
From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:13 PM
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 say that kind of thing in "elavator speeches" describing what we do, but I guess we've never really talked about it, made it a requirement, or put it in the document. Maybe it's time to do so :-) It would be a good cross-check tbat we cover the ground defined by all the specs out there, and would have good PR value.
