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. JimReceived on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 11:46:10 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:14:35 GMT