ant elder wrote:
On 9/27/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
How about the following reordering:
a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
maintenance of open-source software that simplifies the development of
service oriented applications and provides a managed service-oriented
runtime, supporting a range of technologies and based on the standards
defined by the OASIS OpenCSA group, for distribution at no charge to the
public.
Simon
This looks good to me, I have a few comments and questions:
In addition to the programming model aspects, covered by "simplifies the
development of service oriented applications", how about adding
something to cover the deployment, configuration and management models?
Either add "service oriented networks" or at least change "development"
to "development and deployment"?
I'm not sure how "a range of technologies" further expands the scope of
what we're doing, as the OpenCSA standards already span a range of
technologies. Is it really necessary?
Do people want to say something about things we're doing that are not
covered by OpenCSA, the data access service work, the data binding work,
and the SCA implementation and binding extensions that are not covered
by OpenCSA? Are they all covered by the "based on the standards defined
by OpenCSA" statement since they are related to either SCA or SDO?
Ok, adding "deployment" and removing "a range of technologies" gives:
a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
maintenance of open-source software that simplifies the development
and deployment of service oriented applications and provides a managed
service-oriented runtime based on the standards defined by the OASIS
OpenCSA group, for distribution at no charge to the public.
Looks good to me.
I wasn't sure where "service oriented networks" should go?
As I was suggesting earlier "service oriented network" is covered now
that you've added "deployment".
And i haven't
found a way to mention things we're doing that are not covered by OpenCSA
and still keep it reasonably concise and sounding ok - can anyone else?
...ant
It's probably OK as "based on the standards defined by the OASIS
OpenCSA" leaves the door open to extensions.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
