The SML Feedback Worshop took place in Mountain View, California on 12th Septemeber. The workshop was attended by several community members who asked thought-provoking questions and shared their insights and feedback with the SML WG. Thanks to all of you who attended the workshop in person or sent their feedback via email.
This entry is devoted to the feedback on the name "Service Modeling Language". The feedback was that we should replace "Service" with another word that better captures the capabilities of SML. I have seen similar feedback in other postings, including one from William Vambenepe (a co-author of the SML spec). The selection of "Service" has been criticized since:
The above criticism is valid. Hmm..now you must be wondering how and why the WG chose this name? All I can say is that the name was chosen after considerable discussion and debate during which several other alternatives were considered and rejected. The name "Service Modeling Language" was chosen since the members felt that the first major use of SML will be in building models for IT services and systems that can be used for deployment, configuration, and management of the modeled services and systems.
Microsoft's preference was to use the name "SDM" (after all, the SDM specification was the initial input to the WG). This name was considered but rejected (guess why? ;-) )