home > plop > 2006 > Papers > Notes > 3-notes.php

PLoP 2006 Shepherded Papers

Notes on Paper 3: REJECTED

As I have said in my emails to the authors (copied to you)
the paper is not appropriate for the PLoP conference. It is not about
patterns or pattern languages. While it does suggest that it is a
workbench consisting of patterns to use for software development, the
patterns that are included are not the authors' and their included
descriptions is poor at best. The three "new" patterns are equally
poorly composed and may not even be patterns. For example, one of
their "new patterns" is named Frameworks like Struts [24] where
the reference citation [24] refers to the link
http://struts.apache.org/. This pattern is described as:

Context: You are part of architecture team. You are in
 the initial phase of Architecting .
Problem: Applications that are not having proper
separation of concerns lead to difficulties during
development & maintenance
Forces: Architecting applications that do not have a
controller, in the presentation layer, for routing requests. Also, JSPs
handling business logic
Solution: Use frameworks that support MVC architecture

I have also tried to get the authors to remove the
references to antipatterns which they considered to be an important
part of their concept. I suggested that they just mention the patterns
that will eliminate or avoid the processes for which they cite
antipatterns, but they did not do it (although they said that they did
in their comments).

While I truly like the notion of a Pattern Oriented
Workbench for software development, this paper is not that.
 Even in a non-pattern oriented conference this paper needs too much
work for a shepherd.

I cannot recommend acceptance of this paper.

Fred