Heather's choice of language will have precedence over my suggestions here.
I think the word "extend" is intended to mean "to be derived from".
There is probably better language than "extend", or "to be derived
from". What's the UMLish-equivalent term? "constrain" doesn't sound
right to me. Maybe "subtype" but that term seems more programatic than
Vambenepe, William N wrote:
I replaced with the suggested wording. I am still waiting for someone to
explain to me what it means to "extend a manageability property".
Heather, I believe this was your wording. Can you clarify what this
From: Mark Ellison [mailto:elli...@ieee.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 5:04 PM
To: Vambenepe, William N; ws...@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsdm] Groups -
line 390: suggested changes for clarity:
Manageability capabilities define resource specific properties,
operations and events. Details of these manageability capabilities are
exposed by the manageable resource.
A manageable resource MAY also define new resource-specific
A manageable resource SHOULD extend a MUWS manageability
capability when defining a resource-specific manageability capability
that uses similar semantics.
A manageable resource is not required to extend a MUWS
manageability capability when defining a resource-specific
manageability capability that uses conflicting semantics.