FYI I copied the document also to the Streamwork activity in case you don't find the file in the Forge for some reason. https://streamwork.com/activities/soS1QLu4hKaMpJHxtyVC3X?seasip=sap#item=LhRfAjhChEWDjtywIAAa2q Regards, Torsten Dr. Torsten Leidig SAP Research Center CEC Karlsruhe SAP AG Vincenz-Prießnitz-Str. 1 76131 Karlsruhe T +49 6227 7 52535 F +49 6227 78 29753 E torsten.leidig at sap.com http://www.sap.com Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank. This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation. From: Friesen, Andreas Sent: Dienstag, 5. Juli 2011 17:02 To: Juanjo Hierro Cc: Leidig, Torsten; Heller, Markus; Bohnert, Thomas Michael Subject: RE: Comments on uploaded document Hi Juanjo, a new revised version has been uploaded. The status is again "private". BR, Andreas From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Dienstag, 5. Juli 2011 10:45 To: Juanjo Hierro Cc: Friesen, Andreas; Leidig, Torsten; Heller, Markus; Bohnert, Thomas Michael; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: Comments on uploaded document Please confirm the reception of the attached mail. If feasible, also when you plan to finish reviewing the version that I uploaded to the server. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 05/07/11 08:20, Juanjo Hierro wrote: Hi, Note that your chapter is still in "private" state so that you can download and review it. I would kindly ask you to do so and review the changes I introduced in the overview part. I finished with the I2ND chapter but want to work in the IoT Service Enablement chapter prior moving to your chapter. This should give you enough time to review my comments on the overview part. Don't hesitate to contact me in case you have any doubt. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 05/07/11 00:28, Juanjo Hierro wrote: Hi all, I have carefully reviewed the overview section of the chapter. Now I feel much more comfortable. I have introduced several changes, but I hope you will find them useful. In particular, I believe that the Hoster role needed some improvements and a more accurate treatment of some aspects (avoiding cloud lock-in as a separate concept of offering different cloud services to providers). Please take a look. I have uploaded the revised version on the server and change the status to "private". I case you are "awake" :-) and wish to review it, I would kindly ask you to move it to "pending" state and drop me an email. I will now swap again to revision of the I2ND and will come back to your chapter afterwards. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 04/07/11 23:17, Juanjo Hierro wrote: Ok. Got it and move it to the "pending" state. I'm currently performing a review of the overview section and expect to provide a revision of that part before 00:00 CET. Then I will swap to the I2ND chapter and final review of your chapter will come next. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 04/07/11 21:16, Friesen, Andreas wrote: Hi, a new version is now available in FusionForge. Andreas From: Friesen, Andreas Sent: Montag, 4. Juli 2011 21:08 To: 'Juanjo Hierro'; Leidig, Torsten Cc: Heller, Markus; Bohnert, Thomas Michael Subject: RE: Comments on uploaded document Dear Juanjo, yes, an updated version will become available soon. Andreas From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Montag, 4. Juli 2011 19:24 To: Leidig, Torsten Cc: Friesen, Andreas; Heller, Markus; Bohnert, Thomas Michael Subject: Re: Comments on uploaded document Hi, Just to ensure we are synchronized ... I assume that you are the ones that have changed the status of the Apps/Services Ecosystem and Delivery chapter to "pending". I assume this is because you are working on it. Please confirm. Thanks, -- Juanjo On 04/07/11 11:40, Leidig, Torsten wrote: Hi Juanjo, we will try to fix these issues today. Best regards, Torsten Dr. Torsten Leidig SAP Research Center CEC Karlsruhe SAP AG Vincenz-Prießnitz-Str. 1 76131 Karlsruhe T +49 6227 7 52535 F +49 6227 78 29753 E torsten.leidig at sap.com<mailto:torsten.leidig at sap.com> http://www.sap.com Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank. This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation. From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Montag, 4. Juli 2011 07:45 To: Friesen, Andreas Cc: Leidig, Torsten; Heller, Markus; Bohnert, Thomas Michael; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Comments on uploaded document Hi Andreas, I carefully reviewed the whole chapter during this weekend (indeed, I read it twice :-) I haven't produced a version with detailed changes under control because I have a few (congratulations!) and the most significant one is not actually related to content but the structure of the second part (dealing with composition, mashup, etc). This change had implied a significant amount of work and a) I wasn't sure you would agree with it and b) given the risk you may not agree to it, I thought it was more safe to devote the time to chapters that were in a more unmature status. Therefore, I decided to share them with you in this email. All changes can be implemented by you in a parallel task force and I believe they can be finalized today (the one on re-structuring part of it would just require one person, concentrated in the task because it requires some amount of careful editorial work). Note that the document is not in "pending" state, so that you are free to implement any changes on it at this moment. Looking forward your response, -- Juanjo Now my comments: Comment 1: dropping references to WPs and tasks (priority high, must be done) There are some references to WPs and tasks. Not many, but they should be dropped out. Note that this document is for the general public and we are describing there our vision of a product (FI-WARE). People care about the product vision, not the details of the project trying to materialize the vision. This principle has been maintained in the rest of chapters and should be adopted in this chapter for the sake of consistency. In general terms, replacing references to "Work Packages" by references to "chapters" work well. Regarding references to "tasks", you should think what is the best way to express something similar but not making a reference to tasks. This is a change that should be rather easy and I believe you must implement. Comment 2, restructuring of the description of GEs supporting composition/mashup (priority medium-high, rather nice to have) The major editorial comment that would require re-structuring part of the chapter: It has to do with the description of GEs supporting composition/mashup. In general terms, we have tried to organize all chapters so that we describe GEs devoting one section per GE. You indeed follow this approach with respect to GEs related to the Business Framework, dedicating one section to describe each of the GEs that are part of the Reference Architecture associated to the Business Framework: Service Repository, Service Registry, Marketplace, BM & BE Provisioning System, Revenue Sharing and Settlement system, SLA management. However, this same approach is not followed when describing GEs supporting composition/mashup. When describing GEs supporting composition/mashups, you first dedicate a part to describe the difference between the different types of composition/mashup technologies. Then afterwards, you structure the description based on the fact that most of these technologies would support the same set of components: an editor, an execution engine and a repository. Instead of going through the different technologies (which indeed would map to the concept of GE) and create common subsections for each of them describing the particularities of their editors, execution engines and repositories, you decide to make it the other way around and structure the section based on this taxonomy of components (editor, execution engine and repository) and then describe for each of them how it would be mapped for a concrete technology. You may have a high-level overview section at the beginning (same as you have for the Business Framework) where you keep the contents from beginning of section 1.1.3 until end of the subsection titled "Data vs Service Composition". But then I would go, in alignment with what has been done for the Business Framework and for all the chapters, for a structure where we go through the list of the different GEs: Front-end Mashup, Workflow-based Backend Composition, Event-driven Backend Composition, Data Mediator and Protocol Mediator (without grouping these last two). I would like to have this change definitively implemented for the official deliverable by end of July. I can live without it if you definitively believe it's difficult to finish the necessary editorial changes, but I believe it is worth trying it. I would go for generating a version addressing Comment 1 and upload it to the server. Then try to implement this comment. If we leave the integration of this chapter for the very end (tonight), I believe we could make it. Comment 3: Roles described at the beginning of chapter (priority medium, optional at this stage): This comment is rather optional. I would try to do something if you tend to agree, but probably requires further discussion. The feedback I wanna bring, though, is that it took me some time to "digest" the way you map some concepts introduced at the beginning of the document (broker, agencies) into concepts linked to the business framework (marketplace, shops) ... I tend to think that Broker=Marketplace but I'm not perfectly sure ... and the concept of "agencies" is rather obscure to me ... Why don't we just use marketplace and shops which are concepts that many people understand well nowadays ? Besides, they are actually well described in the Business Framework section ... Less relevant, the definition of "provider" given at the beginning of the chapter is rather complex ... probably accurate but as I said, difficult to digest ... Are we referring to "application provider" ... I guess that yes, but then I would use a much simpler description. Note that there is a description of Application/Service Provider already given in section B.1.1.2 of the DoW. We should use a definition which doesn't sound too much different. A company or organization which develops FI applications and/or services based on FI-WARE GE APIs and deploys those applications/services on top of FI-WARE Instances. Note that the open nature of FI-WARE GE specifications enables portability of FI applications and/or services across different FI-WARE Instances. The whole point of this comment is that it took me some time to "digest" the first seven pages of the chapter ... I read it two or three times and I ended up without being 100% sure what a broker and overall an "agency" was. In the first case, because I thought "Isn't it just the marketplace ? Probably not, because otherwise they hadn't invented two different terms for the same thing" So I endedup with the assumption that I was missing something (though I thought I understood the concepts of marketplace, shops and the rest of GEs) ... On the second case, because the concept of agency was unclear to me (an example would actually help) ... "Don't they map to shops ?" I thought several times ... but I was not sure. If it took me some time to "digest" this first part of the document, I'm almost sure it will become hard to many readers. Not because I'm smarter, don't take me wrong, but because it should be easier for me given the fact that I have been involved in the discussion and followed it, but it wasn't. Changing this may not be that easy, unless we take the safe position of dropping that part where we introduce the concept of Broker and Agencies ... Just consider it ... ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-apps/attachments/20110705/48d603bc/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy