- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:32:06 -0700
- To: "'Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)'" <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <005101c270d6$c6bccf10$620ba8c0@beasys.com>
ArtifactsRoger, The term artifact has been used in software for quite some time. Cheers, Dave -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 6:35 PM To: 'www-ws-arch@w3.org' Subject: Artifacts I would like to propose the following glossary entry: Artifact - 1) A remnant of something that is dead and gone, as in "The shard of pottery found in the Yucatan was an artifact of the high Mayan civilization"; 2) A defect or error in something otherwise regular and useful, as in "Sixty cycle interference is a common artifact in monitors sited too close to power sources". Perhaps you can add other meanings for the word? I think you should if you are going to insist on using it. Listening to how you folks are using the word artifact, I hear it meaning different things at different times. The most common meaning that I infer, however, is that it refers to a piece of information which is emitted by some actor in the drama under consideration and potentially consumed by another actor. Uh, isn't that what I would call a message? I have this weird feeling that there is an extreme shyness about using the word message, as if some other discipline has dibs on it. Well, I think that the archeologists more or less have dibs on artifact, and I would really like to hear words that I understand more clearly in the context that you are using them. Best Wishes -- Roger (a.k.a. Andy Rooney, curmudgeon).
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 23:36:19 UTC