Re: Proposal for D-AC017 (Business Functions)

Roger,

I think this type of "detailing" (my, how clean your reliable message is
:-) belongs in the Glossary.  Do you agree?

thanx,
    doug

"Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" wrote:

>  Does that belong in the requirements doc?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Hollander [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:06 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Proposal for D-AC017 (Business Functions)
>
> I agree with the idea but would hope that reliable messaging would be
> detaileda bit...at least in terms of what it accomplishes. The thread
> by David/Chris/et alis what I had in mind.daveH
>
>      -----Original Message-----
>      From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
>      [mailto:[email protected]]
>      Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 2:25 PM
>      To: [email protected]
>      Subject: Proposal for D-AC017 (Business Functions)
>
>      D-AC017 currently reads:
>
>      D-AC017 provides guidance for the development of the Web
>      services infrastructure needed to implement common business
>      functions in a standards-based environment.
>
>      D-AR017.1 The Web services Architecture must support common
>      business functions, to the extent that those functions are
>      defined in similar methodologies such as EDI.
>
>      D-AR017.2 The Web services Architecture must support
>      reliable messaging and routing.
>
>      D-AR017.3 The Web services Architecture must support unique
>      message IDs and message sequencing.
>
>      D-AR017.4 The Web services Architecture must support
>      reliable transaction processing.
>
>      As "champion" of D-AC017 I propose that all of the above be
>      dropped from the Requirements Doc (but, of course, not the
>      Usage Cases) and be replaced by a single requirement:
>
>      The Web Services Architecture Working Group MUST address
>      reliable messaging.
>