- From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
- Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 13:22:07 -0400
- To: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Yes, but doesn't it ignore or obscure the value of design constraint and standards in general to group things like that? Something constrained to an interop standard is trivially in the superset of things that may or may not be so constrained. --Walden ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org> To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 1:04 PM Subject: RE: Proposed Venn Diagrams > > At 11:13 AM 2003-05-09, Champion, Mike wrote: > >I think D and C are disjoint by definition: C uses a "uniform" set of > >operations and D uses custom-defined operations. (BTW, I think I agree > >with Walden's point that "custom" a better antonym for "uniform" than "open" > >is). > > In the WSAWG telecon, Frank talked about the "uses" relationship, so C is a > constrained subset of D. > > D can have lots of verbs, but C is limited to the "uniform" set of verbs or > actions (ala REST). > > Paul > > >
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 13:22:26 UTC