Re: ISSUE-54: Do we need (descriptions of) property functions in SD? Is this in scope for us?

On Feb 16, 2010, at 12:28 PM, Steve Harris wrote:

> On 16 Feb 2010, at 17:23, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> 
>> I'd be surprised if anyone disagrees that this is useful.
>> 
>> However, I have no idea how we would specify it in the service description document. How would we define a property/class that describes something that is not itself defined anywhere? The only way I see to do it is to define what a property function is, and that's beyond our scope.
> 
> Right, this is my feeling too.

Can I take this to mean that my suggested wording isn't acceptable? I'm not sure we need to define exactly what happens when a property function does its thing so long as we indicate that it's up to the implementation, but others may think differently.

.greg

Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 04:15:36 UTC