Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Yep. That is the mantra of logistics analysis. Function is not implementation; it is the contract for testable or observable behavior. It can be done as a description, of course, but there should be, in the logistical description, a means cited to test conformance. Chase that thought you are having a bit further in light of namespaces being a signature for an interface. Then ask yourself if you need or want that given that regardless of the spec, the use of the URN/URL means to too many, a location, not an authoritative owner of a domain. The problems with the semantic web will be superstitious behavior in the face of noisy signal and establishing authority for definitions. Len Bullard Intergraph Public Safety clbullar@i... http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@h...] In manufacturing, we used to talk about "form, fit, and function". If a part or assembly met these three, you could use it in place of the original. Other differences didn't matter. It was almost like an mantra for some people... "Function" would correspond to the actual responses a component provides - what it does. Note that this is NOT implementation. "Form" referred to size, shape, maybe weight, and so on, so it would correspond to interface. "Fit" had to to with tolerances and interconnections, so that seems to be part of interface too. Yes, interface and implementation are very different. Good to remember.
|
