My take on DoV

  I think the role of SpecGL should be to advise the author that DoV is 
something that
  they should be thinking about when writing a spec. We can include 
examples of
  things like levels, profiles etc to illustrate what we mean. However, 
since it seems
  from QAWG discussion that there are differences of opinion on our 
definition of
  p/m/l then I don't think we are in a position to impose a rigid 
definition on others.

  Better to say "consider the possibility of using some kind of DoV 
structure, look at
  these specs for examples of good practice. If it suits your technology, 
create a
  DoV architecture. It doesn't matter if your DoV does not conform to 
someone elses
  definition of a profile or whatever - all you have to do is document 
your chosen system
  and if you have more than one DoV then document the relationship between 

  So I think in SpecGL all DoVs should be under one Guideline. We should 
  p/m/l as examples but not be prescriptive about them. After all, we are 
  people to think about the design of their technology, not trying to 
shoehorn them into
  the design of someone elses technology.


Received on Monday, 28 April 2003 09:46:36 UTC