RE: activity context & context poll

From
Krishna Sankar <>
Date
2001-04-09T15:53:24+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: activity context & context poll
Alastair,

 

    Thanks for the thoughts. Yep, we are thinking in the 
same lines. 

 

    We need a framework at a super-context level so that 
context is exchanges in a uniform manner across web services. As Mark and Sanjay 
pointed out, I think we could define our little world and move forward. The BT 
group might be the first to *require* a context.

 

cheers

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Alastair Green 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 
  8:44 AM
To: Krishna Sankar
Cc: bt 
  models
Subject: Re: activity context & context 
  poll

Krishna, 
  
I also agree with limiting the context to the needs of a cohesion (BT) 
  protocol. The super-context is a) outside our scope/powers and b) arguable. I 
  like the SOAP approach (or the GIOP approach) where many unrelated contexts 
  can travel, and it is a matter of cooperation between different pairs of 
  actors as to how they are interpreted, delegated/retransmitted etc. To take a 
  concrete case in point: what if the rules for delegation are different for 
  security and transactions? I may want to stop propagation in one case, and 
  allow it (or enforce it) in the other. 
  
Where I do strongly agree with your approach is that context information 
  should be freely capable of being written by frameworks or application 
  instances, as well as standardized services of the kind we're working on 
  defining. 
  
So I guess I would only want to see a framework for placing and identifying 
  contexts (perhaps with an IANA like scheme for allocating unique ids for 
  well-known standard contexts), rather than an attempt to tie them all into a 
  super-context. Now, a framework where links are defined (or not defined), and 
  elements may or may not be present may amount to the same thing ... 
  
Alastair 
  
Sanjay Dalal wrote: 
  
    
    <Mark> 
    
      
        
.    2.    
        Context is information other than the actual transaction data and can 
        include the user credentials, any previous state, time of day, 
        geographic location of the calling entity, 
        ...

        
I think that the general context should be a 
        series of specific context instances, one for transactions (which only 
        talks about transaction related stuff), one for security, 
        etc.

        

        
I agree, for us, context has the scope of business transaction 
        only. Of course, it will be good if BT context can sit inside a larger 
        context structure defined somewhere else (like W3C). I agree with Mark, 
        we should concentrate on addressing only the transaction 
        context.sanjay