Re: Z Notation in Part 2 and 3

Hugo,

Yes, I've been thinking that too. Now that most of the components have 
been formalized, that leaves the extensions. The Part 1 spec is very light 
on extensions, so the first thing we should do is formalize extensions in 
Part 1. I was planning to formalize what a MEP is too since they get 
referenced and we need to add some integrity contraints.

In Part 2 we could at least formalized the "signature" of a MEP, e.g. the 
URL, message labels, directions.

In Part 3 we should formalize how binding extend the component model, e.g. 
by extension properties or components.

Are you offering to write the Z? I'd be glad to get you started.

Arthur Ryman,
Rational Desktop Tools Development

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca
intranet: http://labweb.torolab.ibm.com/DRY6/



Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org> 
02/11/2005 10:31 AM

To
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
public-ws-desc-eds@w3.org
Subject
Z Notation in Part 2 and 3






Hi Arthur.

Do we need to add Z Notation to Part 2 and 3?

I have the feeling that Part 2 doesn't need it, but Part 3 probably
does.

Cheers,

Hugo

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/