RE: Status: D-AG0007 - reliable, stable, predictable evolution

Hi Joe,
 
Thanks for the favor:-) 
 
The "sed" processed goal statement reminds me of some migratory bird's path
under the guidance of some not-yet-understood navigational system.
May be, if I were a CIO, it would have made sense to me. The choice ahead,
it seems, for me to either wait a few years and then come back and read the
statement, or read it in another life.
 
Anyway, good try!
Now may be it is time I do you a favor too:-)
 
Take care,
-Suresh
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Hui [mailto:jhui@digisle.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:53 PM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Status: D-AG0007 - reliable, stable, predictable evolution


Hi Suresh,
 
I have no issue with D-AG007; am just here to return a favor ;-)
 
If you're dying to shorten the sentence, try "s/reliable, and
stable/robust/" .
If you feel like making the statement more CIO-friendly, try
"s/and whose evolution is predictable over time/and predictable of its
migrational path/" .
That is:
 
  "is robust and predictable of its migrational path."
 
How's that for some goal-statement nitpicking?  :-)
 
Joe Hui
Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service 
====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Damodaran, Suresh [mailto:Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 3:48 PM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Status: D-AG0007 - reliable, stable, predictable evolution


Goal:
    Goal statement "To develop a standard reference architecture for web
services that is reliable, and stable, and whose evolution is predictable
over time"  This goal has not been revised, and thus, stands.
    "Reliability, stability, and predictable evolution of web services" is
noted in [1] as a non-goal, and perhaps
    should be added to our goals.
 
A proposal was submitted to the WG [1], and was evaluated. The proposal
included measures that
can be taken by WS-A to address reliability, stability, and predictable
evolution through the formation
of C-sets, or "consistent sets" of standards within WS framework.
    A question was raised whether C-sets could stall predictable evolution
[3].
    Similar question was posed in [2] in terms of extension.
    Ensuring "backward compatibility" of individual standards could
potentially address this issue [4]. This will also address the "principle of
partial understanding" in [5].
 
For other questions and responses, please refer to the mails directly.
 
Further, I was referred to [5] as a possible important source. If anybody
has any other source, 
please send them to me. A new rev of the proposal will be made later in
light of the comments and [5].
Date TBD.
 
Regards,
-Suresh
 
 
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0148.html
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0148.html> 
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0158.html
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0158.html> 
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0180.html
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0180.html> 
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0234.html
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0234.html> 
[5]  <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Evolution.html>
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Evolution.html