- From: Jim Webber <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 16:46:00 +0100
- To: "'Munter, Joel D'" <joel.d.munter@intel.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Savas Parastatidis'" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
Hi Joel, > This is a neat and simple idea. From an editorial nature, > you may have left an inadvertent wstx:transactional on page 2 > (in the description following the XML example). It looks as > though you replaced all of these with wstx:supports. Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I have to say we were proposing more a general concept than a finished polished item, so there may be more of these. > Why do you refer to security as a non-functional requirement? Because when I want to do something, say buy a CD, that is the functionality that I am interested in. The fact that I am doing it in a secure way, and perhaps that a transaction is running between the CD seller service, myself, and the credit card service is all non-functional - it's orthogonal to the business logic. Jim
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 11:46:10 UTC