Hi Kelvin, Sorry for the confusion... I was thinking of user stories in the agile / xp sense which are/could be scenarios.
The reason I mentioned "abstract scenario" was to avoid a scenario that runs along the lines of "develop a service component" and instead go for a more specific (concrete scenario/) user story of "develop a service component using Java" - perhaps I should not have mentioned this unless it happened. My, unexplained thinking, was it might become apparent that not all things need to be done in all languages/runtimes. This could help avoid writing code that is not (currently at least) wanted. For example is there a need for the C++ runtime to host a component written in Java ? It would be easier to enable a C++ runtime to use IPC/WS to invoke/compose a Java component rather than having the C++ runtime launch a JVM (IMHO). Apologies for the confusion & thanks for pointing keeping me true :) Dan On 15/01/07, kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that sounds really good Dan. I'd love to know more about what's driving our users or potential users. This could be seen as a nitpick, but I think also there's the potential for some confusion, since you talk about 'abstract scenarios'. I don't see scenarios as particularly abstract, since they are instances of the more abstract 'use case', i.e. a scenario is a single given path through the use case, documenting only one path wherever the use case gives choices. I guess what we would really like to capture are the use cases, but getting some scenarios together is probably not a bad way to begin. So I think your "stories" are really the scenarios, and your scenarios are the use cases. Cheers, Kelvin. On 15/01/07, Dan Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > There have been a number of postings about scenarios. For example: > > - In July > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg04490.html > about JSF using Tuscany > - In Nov > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00319.htmlas > part of the what next for C++ > - More recently > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00416.htmland > - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg12818.html > > Would it be useful to document and maintain a set of scenarios that > Tuscany > does/will support? > > These could be used to validate and help guide what get developed, rather > than relying "what next ?" postings (more permentant record). It could > also > be used to help identify complexity and completeness. Lastley it might > also > make it clearer to differenticate Tuscany from similar projects. Perhaps a > way to kick off would be to start gathering some user stories (rather than > more abstract scenarios) > > WDYT ? > > Cheers, > Dan > >
