[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 01:30 06/03/2002 -0800, Ronald Bourret wrote:
>One consequence of the specs not bringing this out is that the software
>implementing those specs is likely not to separate the functions either.
>That is, it is completely reasonable to put all three (or more)
>functions in the same piece of software and let the user decide what
>they want.
This approach leads to interoperability nightmares.
Example:
Three functions A, B, C provided by systems S1 and S2 that are compliant
with standard X.
If support for A, B and C are optional, the interoperability of S1<->S2
involves
dealing with 3*3 = 9 functionality combinations.
This is made worse by the fact that commercial software vendors will go out
of their way to make it difficult to perform like with like comparisons by
blurring the borders between features A, B and C.
Specs that include "optional" behavior don't help either :-)
Sean
|
