[Sea-sa] Corrigenda for the SEA ASL document, 371.0-G-1

[Shames, Peter M (US 312B)]

Dear SEA-SA colleagues,

As you will already have seen in the note I just sent to our CSS colleagues, we think we need to make some modest changes, via corrigenda, to one specific definition in the ASL and to some other uses of the term “capability”:

Sec 1.5, Pg 1-8:

From:

service: (RASDS) A set of capabilities that a component provides to another component via an interface. A service is defined in terms of the set of operations that can be invoked and performed through the service interface. Service specifications define the capabilities, behavior, and external interfaces, but do not define the implementation. (Reference [17].)
To:

service: (RASDS) A service is a provision of an interface of an object to support actions of another object. (Reference [1].)

Rationale: the quoted definition is from  MO, M&C Services, and not from RASDS.  Furthermore, it is inaccurate since is somewhat casually  inverts the relationship between “service” and “capability”.  A more accurate rendering of the MO definition would be:

service: (MO M&C Services) A set of functions that a component provides to another component via an interface. A service is defined in terms of the set of operations that can be invoked and performed through the service interface. Service specifications define the functions, behavior, and external interfaces, but do not define the implementation. (Reference [17].)
Sec 3.2.4, Pg 3-5:

From:
·         –  the behavior exposed at the interface, in terms of the high-level capabilities or operations supported by the service;

To:

·         –  the behavior exposed at the interface, in terms of the high-level functions or operations supported by the service;
Sec 4.3.4.1, Pg 4-40:

From:
The application support functions include the following capabilities.

To:
The application support capabilities include the following services.

Rationale:

The items in the list that follow this are all titled as “Services”.

There are other uses of the word “capability” in the ASL document that are sufficiently broad in nature as to not require changes, but I believe that  these specific, modest, changes are essential for clarity and consistency.

Does anyone object to making these changes via corrigenda?  And if so, please clearly state your rationale.

Thanks, Peter




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sea-sa/attachments/20210527/af7ae66d/attachment.htm>