Title: RE: [wsrm] editorial updates for 0.93
Iwasa: <JD>
-----Original Message-----
From: iwasa [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 12:58 AM
To: ; Sunil Kunisetty
Cc: Jacques Durand; WSRM (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [wsrm] editorial updates for 0.93
I also agree that the current spec is not describing
messaging model in section2.1, but rather it is explaining
a replypattern. So we can change the name of section.
However I believe we need to mention Messaging Model
first in the section2, which was the reason of the
section title. And the original spec had that I believe.
<JD> Yes, the Section 2 title is fine. The three "Message Reply Patterns" are
part of this messaging model.
So I propose to add a description of messaging model.
That is a couple of sentences to explain
of application layer, RMP, submit, notify, deliver
and so on with simple picture with those words.
It should be similar picture with three pictures in section2.1
And the following section will be ReplyPattern
or Signaling pattern or anything we name with
the current 2.1 content.
<JD> That sounds right, but I notice a larger problem:
Section 2 "Messaging Model" covers in fact all the reliable features.
I think the "messaging model" should be much more narrow in scope,
and all reliable features should be under something like Section 3: "Reliability Features".
In other words, current Section 2 should be split in two I believe.
So we could have:
Section 2: "Messaging Model"
2.1 Could be renamed "Assumptions" (we may insert additional material you propose here?
although not much is needed in my mind besides maybe a recall on the assumed "interface"
with the "app layer" (submit,deliver, notify))
2.2: "Message Reply Patterns" we introduce this subsection to cover the three patterns.
2.3: is current 2.2 renamed "Message Identity and Grouping", to emphasize the identity more.
Section 3: "Reliability Features"
3.1: is current 2.3
3.2: is current 2.4, etc.
...
Section 4: is current Section 3 ("Message Format")
Opinion?
Thanks,
Iwasa
