Re: agenda for today's MEP call

On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 21:18:22 +0600
"Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote:
> More patterns?? So are we really going to have > 10 patterns?

No.

As part of the exploration of what needs to be defined, I took on the
task of mechanically producing a number of variants, by applying all
possible variables to all combinations of one- and two-message patterns.

Many of the patterns so produced are clearly not useful.  The result of
the study, though, sheds an interesting light on how patterns are
defined, and may help to elucidate which variables (apart from sequence,
cardinality, direction) may need to be included (if any).

Amy!
> IMHO this is going entirely in the wrong direction if we keep
> adding more patterns. I supported the MEP concept but never
> expected we'd be having 10 MEPs in the document.

Tsk.  We're not even certain whether we're talking about MEPs, or IOPs,
or some other form of pattern for messages.  There is certainly no
suggestion that more patterns will be added to the current part two
document, and if they were to be proposed, it would clearly have to go
through the WG gauntlet.

Personally, I think we have already included patterns that are poorly
motivated.

> I'm sorry to say that I can't join this call tonite .. its a
> bit late for me.
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>
> To: <public-ws-desc-meps@w3.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 9:08 PM
> Subject: agenda for today's MEP call
> 
> 
> >
> > Agenda for today's MEP call (1:00-2:30pm EDT):
> >
> > A. New patterns from Amy?
> >
> > B. The pattern p2 family in meps-vs-iops[1]
> >
> >
> > 1.
> >
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/meps-vs-iops/meps-vs
> -iops_clean.htm
> >
> > --
> > David Booth
> > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> > Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
> 


-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com

Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 11:29:30 UTC