- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 14:23:44 -0700
- To: "'Champion, Mike'" <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
I don't want to focus on this issue any more. How about DRegistry where a D on a term indicates it's a Draft term, but not final? Same thing we do with reqs. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Champion, Mike > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:15 PM > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Current summary of Label for Top Node of > "triangle diagram" > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 4:22 PM > > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Subject: Current summary of Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram" > > > > > > Thanks, Dave, this is VERY appreciated!!!! > > > Seems that the use of Registry is ok for the most number of > > people but it also has an objection. > > > > I'm not sure quite how to get to consensus on this issue. > > Do people think we need to arrive at consensus quickly? In > light of my > message about the Choreography effort, I'd be happy if we > called this the > "Registry, Repository, Discovery Mechanism/Agency, or > Whatever", known by > the acronuym RRDMAW, so we can move on. (I'm only about half > joking!) Maybe > after we have some perspective on what the rest of the > framework looks like, > the answer will become clearer. > > As someone (many people?) noted, "naming things" is one of > the two hardest > problems in computer science. IMHO, we should try to keep it > out of our > critical path. > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2002 17:27:38 UTC