RE: [RTF] Glossary entry ""metric of Architectural component"

+1

Architecture component is better.

Hao 

-----Original Message-----
From: Damodaran, Suresh
To: 'Mark Baker'
Cc: Wsa-public (E-mail)
Sent: 7/3/02 5:28 AM
Subject: RE: [RTF] Glossary entry ""metric of Architectural component"


Mark,

Given the current defn of Architecture in the glossary, I am fine with
using "software component" (we will discuss this further in RTF)

However, as I pointed out earlier, use of "software" as a qualifier
does not seem right for WS component or WS architecture. What is
accomplished
by software can be accomplished by hardware tomorrow, may be using 
living cells day-after-tomorrow! 

Cheers,

-Suresh
Sterling Commerce   



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 2:15 PM
To: Damodaran, Suresh
Cc: Wsa-public (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [RTF] Glossary entry ""metric of Architectural component"


Hi Suresh,

On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 01:43:47PM -0500, Damodaran, Suresh wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> 
> >From glossary [2] I find:
> 
> Architecture
> The software architecture of a program or computing system is the
structure
> or structures of the system, which comprise software components, the
> externally visible properties of those components, and the
relationships
> among them."
> 
> =>
> 	Architecture component = (software) component of the (software)
> architecture.

Ok.  But why would "software component" not suffice?  "component" itself
is quite overloaded, and really should be qualified.  I'm just
suggesting that we use the qualification that is already in our
architecture definition, rather than define a new term.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com