From meeting notes on 11/2
VENs and resourcers.
- One side: a ven has exactly one resource, all it shares.
- Other side: a ven may have multiple resources that it may choose to share.
- 3rd occasionally - a single VEN might be instantiated as buildings or in hundreds of locales.
I think a VEN is a resource. A VTN is virtual resource. A party can manage or contol multiple VENs and VTNs.
That's where you ge3t the multiplicity of a party into resources.
VEN is sometimes a party and sometimes a resource. confusing. 1::1 ven::resource
EK I don't think a ven is a party or resource. it's a means of interacting with a VTN. A service point.
Resources and parties: Documentation is a bit muddled.
Vens and resources
EK is it reasonable to say a party is an entity. Resource is a commodity potentially owned by a party. VEN is a role.
AGgree: VEN is a role that a Party takes
EC gale horst wrote a nice paper expressing in one way. What you're proposing is different. Havn't seen that written down. Need the arch model for the business relationships.
ACTION BILL - write section in context of wd33?
T: Section 3 is about that - where we wrote it down. Fundamental issue tapdancing around in section 3. EdKea doesn't damage things as much. Edge of the same problem.
Trying to not say "this is the only way you can do business" If we said "this is the only way to set up your business relatoinships" would remove ambiguity. But that ambiguity allows you to structure as you wish (or already have). When I sketch a ven - see it atop the meter with an internet connection. But don't want to say what target does - their VEN is in Minneaplolis and is distributed all over. Should I say everyone should do it that way? No, EdKea says no. Want to allow different peopel to do different business relationships with these parts. Don't prevent different people doing that.
We fought over section 3 long and hard - not touching it. We can summarize at end, ...so it doesn't damage the rest of it.