RE: Friendly amendment #2c [Re: Straw poll on "synchronous" definitions]

"Anne Thomas Manes" <anne@manes.net> wrote on 03/15/2003 06:11:32 PM:

> The biggest issue I have with Ugo's definition (and all the others) is 
that they tie synchrony 
> with blocking versus non-blocking. Synchronous means "at the same time". 
Asynchronous means "not 
> at the same time". Whether or not the sender has to wait idly for a 
response is a separate issue. 
> 
> An interaction (one-way, two-way, or multi-way) is synchronous if the 
sender and receiver must 
> communicate at the same time (the reciever must be available to receive 
the message when the 
> sender sends it). A one-way message is asynchronous if the sender and 
receiver do not need to 
> communicate at the same time (the message may be stored and delivered at 
a later time). 
> 
> Anne

Precisely. 

<snip/>
Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624