[epf-dev] Re: epf-dev Digest, Vol 4, Issue 96

[kd3725 <kd3725@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, April 26, 2006 7:03 am, Sigurd Hopen said:

<snip>
  

The above can hardly be characterized as a mechanism - can it ??   It is a
description of important attributes to consider for the Architectural
Mechanism called Persistence.



So, what do you all think ?  Possible to reposition this without rocking
the
boat ?

    

I'd rather rock the boat a bit.  ;-)

I found the discussion of "architecture mechanisms" a bit abstract.  I
frankly can't recall anyone using the term "mechanisms" in practice,
although to describe the things that Sigurd has discussed "architectural
concerns" or less frequently "architectural issues".

If we want OpenUP to be attractive to developers then we need to use terms
which people are familiar with, IMHO.

- Scott
http://www.ambysoft.com/scottAmbler.html

  

I'd have to agree with Scott and say that we should simpler terms (as in from conversational language).  Perhaps if there are specialized terms, then a plugin can be constructed to modify OpenUP to include those terms?

kd3