Issue 7808: Section 10.1 (uml-qos-ft-ftf) Source: BAE SYSTEMS (Mr. Kevin Dockerill, kevin.dockerill(at)baesystems.com) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: This comment is listed as minor on the assumption that the QoS Categories listed are examples (see comment above). The QoS Categories listed seem to mix different concepts, namely Software Quality Factors (SQF), Design Characteristics and general QoS (or bucket!). Examples of SQF's and design characteristics are attached to these comments. Also, we have promoted three sub-categories of Performance, namely Timing, Accuracy and Resource. The comment here is that projects will have different views on categories and it is unlikely there will be a strong consensus. I don't think the profile does this because the QoS Categories listed are not specifically in the profile, but examples. You should include these examples, but structure the lists of QoS Categories - I suggest SQF and Design Characteristics at least. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: September 30, 2004: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 30 Sep 2004 06:24:12 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Kevin Dockerill Company: BAE SYSTEMS, Warton, Lancs UK mailFrom: Kevin.dockerill@baesystems.com Notification: No Specification: UML Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms Section: Section 10.1 FormalNumber: Ptc/2004-06-01 Version: Draft RevisionDate: 7/21/2004 Page: 31 Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Description This comment is listed as minor on the assumption that the QoS Categories listed are examples (see comment above). The QoS Categories listed seem to mix different concepts, namely Software Quality Factors (SQF), Design Characteristics and general QoS (or bucket!). Examples of SQF's and design characteristics are attached to these comments. Also, we have promoted three sub-categories of Performance, namely Timing, Accuracy and Resource. The comment here is that projects will have different views on categories and it is unlikely there will be a strong consensus. I don't think the profile does this because the QoS Categories listed are not specifically in the profile, but examples. You should include these examples, but structure the lists of QoS Categories - I suggest SQF and Design Characteristics at least.