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

Re: Mapping Specs to the Architecture

From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:21:42 -0800
Cc: "Newcomer, Eric" <Eric.Newcomer@iona.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Message-Id: <ED63458D-53E5-11D7-9920-000393A3327C@fla.fujitsu.com>

I think that this is a good suggestion. A friendly amendment would be 
to draw a cloud around parts of the diagram that related to a specific 
specification. I will have a go at doing both.

Frank

On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 06:51  AM, Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
wrote:

> Well, that's one possibility.  I was thinking more along the lines of 
> taking the complicated diagram -- the one with Agent, Service, Legal 
> Entity, Goal etc -- and doing something like coloring boxes to 
> indicate spec residence.  For example, a box could be green if there 
> is a spec, orange if there is a WG/TC and blank if not.  Or the 
> name(s) of the spec(s) could be put into the boxes with a similar 
> color code.
>  
> I'm not suggesting that the complicated diagram should have these as a 
> normal part -- I'm suggesting using it as a template for a special 
> "spec coverage" diagram.
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Newcomer, Eric [mailto:Eric.Newcomer@iona.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 12:50 AM
> To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Mapping Specs to the Architecture
>
> 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.
>
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2003 12:22:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:16 GMT