[cap-talk] "Same" key

David Hopwood david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk
Fri Feb 9 19:34:54 CST 2007


I wrote:
> Norman Hardy wrote:
> 
>>This is one of those many situations where we shift our manner of  
>>speaking in a way to confuse new-comers.
>>I don't see an alternative.
> 
> The alternative is to say that the service is a composite, and to describe
> its overall functionality, its facets, and its internal objects.

Internal composites, I should say in order to cover the general case (if you
only want to describe one layer of implementation). In simple cases they will
be internal objects.

> Isn't this precisely the kind of case that the "composite" concepts and
> terminology are designed to address, without need for any audience-specific
> terminology shifts?

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk>



More information about the cap-talk mailing list