Issue 15324: Figure 22: Interfaces (same as figure 21) (soaml-rtf)
Source: SINTEF (Brian Elvesæter, brian.elvesater(at)sintef.no)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Minor
Summary: The Shipping and ScheduleProcessing interfaces should be stereotyped <<Provider>>.Also as stated above (issue 7) the concept of Cability as written in the standard is ambiguous as it has two different semantics whether seen from the business perspective or the IT perspective. I would personally only use the concept on the business level, thus a Capability should not be able to realize a ServiceInterface. The standard should clarify the ambiguity of the concept and choose one consistent meaning. I suggest restricting the Capability concept to the business perspective only. Thus, a ServiceInterface (IT perspective) exposes a Capability (business perspective).
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
July 1, 2010: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
s is issue # 15324	From: Brian Elvesær <Brian.Elvesater@sintef.no>

Figure 22: Interfaces (same as figure 21)


The Shipping and ScheduleProcessing interfaces should be stereotyped <<Provider>>.Also as stated above (issue 7) the concept of Cability as written in the standard is ambiguous as it has two different semantics whether seen from the business perspective or the IT perspective. I would personally only use the concept on the business level, thus a Capability should not be able to realize a ServiceInterface. The standard should clarify the ambiguity of the concept and choose one consistent meaning. I suggest restricting the Capability concept to the business perspective only. Thus, a ServiceInterface (IT perspective) exposes a Capability (business perspective).