[Osvaldo Kotaro Takai]
... mustn't the template name (RUP of Rose) be exchanged?

[wmj]
Can be done in a jiffy.

[Paul Oldfield]
However, other developers have other world
views, and don't want 4+1 imposed on them.

[wmj]
How to assure System (blueprints) consistency when 'developers' and other
stakeholders have divergent 'world views'?

Kind regards
WMJ

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Osvaldo Kotaro Takai
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 6:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Rossomando, Philip'; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'English, Art'; 'Lowe, Jeff'
Subject: RES: (ROSE) RES: (RUP) The 4+1 View Model of Architecture



Hi PaulOldfield1

No problems. I thank your opinion.
But, as a consequence, mustn't the template name (RUP of Rose) be
exchanged?

[]'s
Takai.

-----Mensagem original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviada em: s�bado, 4 de maio de 2002 06:01
Para: Osvaldo Kotaro Takai
Cc: 'Rossomando, Philip'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'English, Art'; 'Lowe, Jeff'
Assunto: Re: (ROSE) RES: (RUP) The 4+1 View Model of Architecture

(responding to Osvaldo Kotaro Takai)

> I think that you didn't understand Art's thought.
>
> If does Rose own a RUP's template, why to don't accommodate perfectly
> its own concepts?.
>
> I think that Rational had to review the concepts to nullify suches
> discrepancies clearly identified by Art.

With respect, I think you didn't understand Jeff's objection.

Not all Rose users always want RUP's 4+1 dogma imposed
on them.  The 4+1 Views and Use Case Driven dogma are
doing a good job, and are fine in their place.  And yes, it would
be sensible if Rose were flexible and could support more than
one set of top level views, so those using Rose with RUP and
applying the dogma could have a tool that directly supports
this world view.  However, other developers have other world
views, and don't want 4+1 imposed on them.

Please don't take my use of the word 'dogma' in respect to
RUP to be derogatory, it is not intended as such.

Paul Oldfield

any opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of
Mentors of Cally


****************************************************************************
*****
* RUP Forum is a public venue for discussions about the
* Rational Unified Process (RUP).
*
* For RUP support materials, process Plug-Ins, tutorials, whitepapers,
* a biweekly column, Rational University training courses, and more,
* please visit the Rational Developer Network (available to Rational
* customers) at:  http://www.rational.net.
*
* For technical support of RUP, RPW, Rose or any other Rational
* product, please visit: http://www.rational.com/support
*
* For other discussion groups, such as Rose and UML, please
* sign up at: http://www.rational.com/support/usergroups/index.jsp
*
* To reply to a posting, please "Reply to all" or send
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email:
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rup_forum
*
****************************************************************************

************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Post or Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
*    http://www.rational.com/support/usergroups/rose/rose_forum.jsp
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*    To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*    Subject: <BLANK>
*    Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*************************************************************************

Reply via email to