[INFOD-WG] Chapter 1 changes

[Fisher, SM (Steve)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronny Fehling [mailto:ronny.fehling at oracle.com] 
> Sent: 10 March 2007 18:33
> To: Fisher, SM (Steve)
> Cc: infod-wg at ggf.org
> Subject: Re: [INFOD-WG] Chapter 1 changes
> 
> hey,
> 
> I think people are indeed having a difficult time understanding the 
> concept and differences of entities and end-points.
> I'm not sure, but I think we should perhaps lend the 
> vocabulary from SOA.

I was looking for a way of minimising changes. However I think that you
are right. This means changing the name of almost every call!

I will make a proposal.

Steve

> We don't talk much about the client architecture (obviously 
> since it's 
> not part of the spec) - but we could speak of them in terms 
> of services.
> Basically, we require a service architecture where the 
> Registry is one 
> Service End-point and a set of external (client)-services. 
> People should 
> be able to understand that notion.
> Then whatever we decide to name the 'entities', we should 
> refer to them 
> as internal registry objects. People seem to get confused 
> about the word 
> entity as being the external service - when we speak in the base spec 
> about a consumer or publisher entity, people immediately 
> think about the 
> external services as being those entities - which is wrong. 
> Perhaps we should include a simple graphic in our spec that 
> would show 
> something like the following:
> 
> [external service point]     -  [infod Registry service 
> point] - [Infod 
> Object/Entity]
> 
> I don't know if my wording makes sense - I would like to put 
> this on the 
> agenda for next weeks call.
> 
> Ronny
> 
> 
> Fisher, SM (Steve) wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have finally started to work again on chapter 1. I am 
> looking to make
> > the minimal chnages to nomenclature. I find that by saying that
> > operations such as create (publisher) are with respect to the entity
> > rather than the external object then we have no problem 
> with out choice
> > of verbs.
> >
> > To avoid confuion I no longer class a subscription as a 
> special entitity
> > - it is simply a subscription.
> >
> > I thought again about the term resource for anything held in the
> > registry. I now think that this is confusing and would like 
> to change it
> > to registry entry.
> >
> > Further I will avoid the term INFOD objects but call them external
> > objects.
> >
> > Comments please - especially if you object!
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >  
> > --
> >   infod-wg mailing list
> >   infod-wg at ogf.org
> >   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/infod-wg
> >   
>