Subject: Re: Master list of changes
From: Rick Reed TSE (rickreed#tseng.co.uk)
Date: Fri Dec 01 2000 - 12:30:12 GMT
Dear Birger, Martin and others
Birger Møller-Pedersen (ETO) at Birger.Moller-Pedersen#eto.ericsson.se
wrote on 30/11/2000 08:38:
> When we discussed the contribution from Rick on virtual state diagram, it was
> agreed that this had to be solved, and that his solution would be the solution
> if no one came up with a better solution during the meeting.
>
> According to the Master List of corrections, the following is now part of
> Z.100:
>
> "The <state partition area> of <interaction area> identifies the state machine
> (composite state) of the agent, which may be given directly as an agent graph
> or by reference to a state definition."
>
> So, these are two equivalent ways of defining the state machine of an agent
> (and of agent types), and it should be possible to do the same thing
> independent of the form.
>
> The fact that we had not revisited this point was discovered during the review
> of the minutes, and therefore this sentence was added.
It is still not clear to me what is agreed.
Should we change the syntax to:
<state partition reference area> ::=
[ <virtuality> ] <state symbol> contains <state name>
with a corresponding change in the textual syntax?
What is static conditions (if any) should there be?
I think we said in the informal discussion that the virtuality for the agent
has to match the virtuality of the agent's state machine.
In any case, I suggest that Birger should provide the suggested text for the
Master list of changes, and we come to any agreement on whether this was the
intent of the meeting (or not).
-- Rick Reed - rickreed#tseng.co.uk Tel:+44 1455 55 96 55 Fax:+44 1455 55 96 58 Mob.:+44 7970 50 96 50
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Mon May 05 2008 - 20:30:55 GMT