- From: <michael.mahan@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 13:41:57 -0400
- To: <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3c.org>
Hi,
>Ok, so how about this ...
>
>We use "component" to refer to software components like proxies,
>gateways, etc.. And we use the term "facilities" (any better
>ideas?) to
>refer to security, privacy, etc..
>
>I personally prefer keeping the word "component" reserved for software
>components, because in the field of software architecture (in which I
>include our work), it is so reserved.
>
After querying the web for component and software architecture, I
have not run across a reservation for the term as you have asserted. What
I have found is that components are typically described as a function-
agnostic, packaging or container models which describe:
What a component offers to other components
What a component requires from other components
What collaboration modes are used between components
Synchronous via operation invocation
Asynchronous via event notification
Which component properties are configurable
What the business life cycle operations are
Our resident software architecture expert has concurred yet hedged by saying
that the term is highly overloaded. (Interesting side note is that he also mentioned
that pattern or principal based architectural descriptions are gaining favor relative
to component-based architectural descriptions.)
I have not been vigilant in my search. Hence, can you point to a reference(s)
which defines software component that supports your restricted definition?
Thanks, Mike
Received on Thursday, 27 June 2002 13:43:22 UTC