+1
Jishnu Mukerji
Mike Clements wrote:
> It's easy for us to underestimate the value of the UML models since we
> already understand the spec. I find UML more intuitive and easier to
> read than XML.
>
> It was only a few months ago when I was reading these specs for the
> first time. When I was doing that the 2 things that helped me the most
> in understanding it were the written text and the UML. The XML is an
> essential normative part of the spec, but it is virtually useless in
> gaining understanding. XML is intuitively readable only to robots and
> vulcans.
>
> Pictures are useful. If UML is too detailed and expensive to keep up to
> date, let's replace it with some kind of non-normative block diagram.
> That way we get the intuitive advantages of pictures without the hassles
> of maintaining detailed and redundant UML.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 11, 2004 1:13 PM
> *To:*
> *Subject:* [wsdm] Editorial comments
>
> I suggest that we remove all UML models which define the
> capabilities throughout MUWS and MOWS specs because
> 1) it is hard to keep XML and UML syncronized
> 2) the information in UML is redundant to the normative
> definitions of the XML
> 3) the value of these models is not incredibly useful for
> understanding the specs
> 4) it makes sense to focus on XML information definitions
> and exchanges which is what gives us interoperability
>
> --* **Igor Sedukhin* .. ()
> --* (631) 342-4325* .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788
>
--
Jishnu Mukerji
Senior Systems Architect 1001 Frontier Road, Suite 300
Technology Office Bridgewater NJ 08807, USA
Management Software Organization Tel: +1 908 243 8924
Hewlett-Packard Company Fax: +1 908 243 8850
mailto:
