(proposed doc attached for ref, no change
since yesterday)
Sally,
I agree with you that we should try to
reuse as much as possible. So far, we have the following levels in the
use-cases, as described in the proposed, attached doc:
The business eco-system: This
is for reference, so we can tell a story. It is non-normative, and just
sticks to creating a world with actors, ownership, public/private
relations, business flows, etc, such as Monica has elaborated, and made a
great case for. We need this level to make the actual use-cases readable.
The abstract use-cases: Tied to
a (single?) business flow, and thus, the actors, we have an opportunity to
specify an abstract BPEL that orchestrates services (actors). We need a
template for this. Sally, you have a template in mind I think.
The executable use-cases:
Perhaps several, tied to a single abstract use-case. Here the private
aspects of orchestration can be expressed. We also need a template for
this, and it will probably be related, but different from the template we
use for abstract use-cases.
Thus we need two(2) templates for
use-cases. One for abstract, one for executable use-cases. Sally, in the
proposed attached doc, I took the template as you earlier put forth, and
blended in aspects from Simpl-eb, and then tried to make two(2) templates. They
are not perfect, and still need a lot of work done on them. Would you have the
time and available energy to be able to review the two(2) templates and
comment/critique what we need for abstract and executable use-cases? Your
experiences working with other groups that are tackling these same problems
will be invaluable!
Sally, I’m also looking forward to
the work you are collecting from the BMC TC J
Thanks,
++harvey
-----Original Message-----
From: Sally St. Amand
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003
10:05 PM
To:
Subject: [wsbpel-uc] Use Case
Template
Hi all-
My intent to put my thoughts re the revised template
was interrupted by the blackout. Fortunately I was not in NYC on Thurs; so I
missed the opportunity to sleep in Bryant Park which would hve been my choice
over Grand Central. But we did lose power; it came back on Fri.
I agree with Harvey's point "for every
abstract use case there is one or more executable use cases" . Because we
are working with "ideas" the choice of words is important to insure
that we are all on the same page.
I was OK with using usage sceario for high level use
cases. As we move into specifics using the term use cases is probably necessary
to get a broad understanding of what we need and are trying to do. My way of
describing this is illustrated in the attachment DegreesOfUseCases.
I have revised the template; see the attachment. I
agree with Harvey we need to relate use cases to its business process; and I
also think we should indicate what aspect of the spec we hope to focus on with
the particular use case.
I am also on the BCM TC. At a con call today David
Webber said there was a template for collecting use cases being developed
by the UN/CEFACT TMG. He forwarded it to me along with several commentaries
from different people. I will forward this material to the group later today or
tomorrow. Instead of thinking of it as innundation, I prefer to think of it as
sharing the wealth. I have not had the time to read it.
I will read it and see if it helps sharpens the focus
on what we are trying to do.
Sally
WSBPEL Use Case Catalogue [v02].doc
