[CESG] Magenta, Blue and Profiles

[Hooke, Adrian J (9000)]

> Application profile is a perfectly good term of art that is also reflected in the ISO PICS
> document I referenced earlier.  Relabeling it "utilization profile" does not in any
> way change the nature of the specification.



Correct. However, I continue to advocate the deprecation of the term "Application Profile" because of the ambiguity in the word "application". On one hand it describes what the user wants to do (how to apply some protocols to a particular problem) and on the other it has the connotation of a particular protocol in the Application layer.



Take IP over CCSDS: the user wants to run IP across CCSDS links. But calling it an Application Profile suggests that IP is an Application layer protocol, which it isn't. Can't we just purge the term and move on with the terminology that I thought we had agreed-upon in February? --



a.      CCSDS Recommended Standard (something that internally contains a native specification developed by CCSDS)

b.      CCSDS Recommended Standard: Adaptation Profile (something that adopts/adapts a native specification developed somewhere else, such as by another standards organization)

c.       CCSDS Recommended Standard: Utilization Profile (something that specifies how to use one or more existing CCSDS Blue Books to perform a particular function)



Why retain a third kind of Profile?



Best regards

Adrian


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20110416/0694b2c5/attachment.htm