On 4/19/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 for keeping SCXML. > > Firstly since Rahul has done the work then I don't think we should try > to impose a name. Secondly, since it is an implementation of a spec, > then using that in its names looks like a good idea to me. Lastly if > we want a component with a generic name like "state", "statechart", > etc - then IMO we need someone to come forward with some generic > "state", "statechart" etc. code. As no-one seems to proposing/offering > that - then lets stick with the actual concrete thing we have - which > is Rahul's SCXML.
What Niall said. +1. -- Martin Cooper Niall > > On 4/17/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A fairly random stringing on my thoughts on the topic ... > > > > Since there was talk about whether SCXML makes a good name for the > > component, its only appropriate that I list some reasons. State means > > little to me (or better, means so many things that is becomes > > extremely fuzzy). A statechart, to me, is a graphical entity, tied to > > the modeling layer, and in general does not cleanly tie in to any > > execution environment. There is lot of state chart theory around, many > > flavors exist with minor semantic deltas (UML 1.5/2.0, STATEMATE, > > RHAPSODY, and now SCXML). I think nothing defines scope and semantics > > better for this component that clarifying that we use SCXML semantics > > (by default) via the component name. We shouldn't lose this clarity > > only to have to struggle to regain it via numerous clarifications on > > the mailing lists each time a related question is raised. We need an > > oracle. We have a bunch of smart folks from a leading standards > > organization giving us just that. Maybe some years down the line, the > > abbreviation SCXML may become more commonly known. > > > > If all of us here drop this component on the floor and walk away from > > it today, I believe that after any arbitrary amount of time, someone > > with a beginner level understanding of Java and XML can pick it up, > > hold the SCXML document from the W3C by its side, and atleast figure > > out if the thing is doing what it is supposed to do -- and if not, > > attempt to correct it. Also, JCP, RFE and W3C standard driven projects > > have an easier time managing their scope. > > > > No user has complained about the component name, mailing list prefix > > used etc. (though having injected this debate into the mix, this may > > now come up frequently). StateChartXML is a decent suggestion, though > > I'm personally not motivated enough to make the change. I will be > > breaking some user code before the first RC (I'll post a note to the > > user list when that happens), but changing Java package names will > > probably cause more confusion that is warranted, so those are best > > retained. > > > > Finally, recounting from personal experience, when I came to Commons, > > I knew what I was looking for (Digester). I didn't know what Jelly > > was, what JEXL stood for, what betwixt was getting in between, what > > configuration was configuring nor what latka did. Then one day, I read > > the descriptions. > > > > -Rahul > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
