Re: [soa-rm-ra] Interaction

[Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>]

Jeff,

Let's assume we partition the same way as we did for the RM.  I talk about things from the perspective of being in/pointed to from the service description and how that serves as an initial basis for establishing the execution context.  I'll talk about what is there and how it needs to be there in order to initiate interaction.  You can then take it for how to use it during the interaction.

Ken

P.S. Please scrape a Word copy and higlight what you are cutting out.  That will make it easy for me to evaluate whether it fits just to move it over.

On Oct 10, 2006, at 8:24 PM, Jeffrey A. Estefan wrote:

> Ken,
> �
> With respect to the metadata issue, we can probably drop the term altogether.� It is certainly abused as Cory Doctorow points out i "Metacrap: Putting the torch to seven straw-men of meta-utopia" (http://www.well.com/~doctorow/metacrap.htm).
> �
> I'd like to move the detailed discussion of the Information model elements laid out in the Interaction section currently to the Service Description section.� I have a lot more material on the message level information model and the service-level information model, but it doesn't belong in the Interaction section.� And we can drop the Metadata in Review subsection altogether.� I'm not that hung up on the term.
> �
> How would you like to proceed?� Would you like me to capture the specifics of the data-level, message-level, and service-level information models in a separate doc or Wiki for now and then let you comb through it?� I'm going to start cutting out the material in the current Interaction write-up right now.
> �
> �- Jeff
> �
> �
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305     phone:  703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                        fax:        703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508