RE: Layers in the WSA (was RE: [Fwd: UN/CEFACT TMG Releases e-Bus ines s Architecture Technical Specification for Public Review])

Alternatively it could be a separate document, referenced from the main
document, which could have its own development life cycle.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Duane Nickull [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 1:51 PM
To: Burdett, David
Cc: 'Champion, Mike'; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Layers in the WSA (was RE: [Fwd: UN/CEFACT TMG Releases
e-Bus ines s Architecture Technical Specification for Public Review])


David et al:

I don't know if this would match the convention of our WSA document, but 
it may be an idea to have the section in the doc describe the 
functionality of the component, its' interfaces and formal functional 
constraints, then add a small non-normative section that may discuss any 
specifications or technologies that could  be investigated for use as 
that component.

The downside is that this may age the WSA doc if those specs change.

Duane

Burdett, David wrote:
> I agree, but do we call out a list of specific features anywhere? ... 
> and if we did, should we say anything about the dependencies between 
> them (which there surely are) and how they would/could be composed
together?
>