Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf
Vamsi, Regarding the 3 points you make; 1. Section 3.1.4 does not talk about 0..1 for implementation The (0..1) you're looking for is actually in section 3.1 where the pseudo-schema for componentType lives Note that the service and reference sections don't repeat this (0..1) either. 2. Line 607-608: Not true for Java EE Java EE has some restrictions on the reuse of certain implementation types under specific circumstances. I don't think that this makes the general statement in these lines incorrect. 3. Line 609: in xxx.composite is xxx needed? OK. Fixed editorially. Yours, Mike. Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO. Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC. IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain. Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 Email: From: C Vamsi <> To: Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB Cc: "OASIS Assembly" <> Date: 11/02/2009 17:18 Subject: Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf Responses inline in <vamsi> tags. ++Vamsi Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk. ibm.com> To C Vamsi/India/IBM@IBMIN 11/02/2009 14:52 cc Subject Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf Vamsi, Sorry for missing the earlier set of comments. Responses inline and updates included in new Rev4 version of spec. Yours, Mike. Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO. Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC. IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain. Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 Email: From: C Vamsi <> To: Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB Cc: "OASIS Assembly" <> Date: 10/02/2009 17:35 Subject: Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf Mike, I will raise new issues as per your comments. There are more comments (the first set actually) in an e-mail that I sent before the one you acted on. See [1] [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200902/msg00005.html ++Vamsi Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk. ibm.com> To "OASIS Assembly" 10/02/2009 22:47 <> cc Subject Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf Vamsi, I'm sorry for missing your comments ahead of the call. I've had a proper look at them now and I've acted on them as described inline... I incorporated the changes into an updated Rev4 along with the 3 editorial fixes from the TC call today. If anyone has any problems with these editorial fixes, please shout now! Yours, Mike. Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO. Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC. IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain. Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 Email: From: C Vamsi <> To: C Vamsi <> Cc: Date: 04/02/2009 20:55 Subject: Re: [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf Some more comments: Line 870: 4.3.1 instead of 5.3.1? Updated as an editorial fix Section 4.4 name should be Component Property? No - the whole section is "Component" and this is a subheading Line 1064: @name attribute Fixed as an editorial Line 1064-1066: Should the wording be made consistent with that of service and reference elements? I think that's a subject for an Issue Line 1078: change to "Overrides the many specified for this property in the component type of the implementation." Fixed as an editorial Lines 1152-1154: Multiple property elements with same property name is a violation of "[ASM50030]" I agree. That's a subject for an issue. Line 1157: stockQuoteService with a small s Fixed as an editorial Line 1166: stockQuoteService with a small s Fixed as an editorial ++Vamsi Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org C Vamsi/India/IBM@I BMIN To 05/02/2009 01:26 cc Subject [sca-assembly] Some review comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf I have reviewed the document partially and here are some comments on sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd02-Rev3.pdf: Line 212: component with small c Fixed - editorial Line 225: us xs:QName for consistency Fixed - editorial Line 245: What does implementation 0..1 mean? Means that <implementation/> is optional with maxOccurs=1 Line 377: "zero or more" in bold font. Fixed - editorial Line 431-432: Change to "The implementation can use the supplied value in any way that it chooses." Fixed - editorial Section 3.1.4 does not talk about 0..1 for implementation It has a "?" in the pseudo-schema <vamsi> Other subsections in the section explicitly say in the descriptive text about the respective multiplicity. So, I was wondering if it should be done for this subsection as well. </vamsi> Line 464: implementation instead of implementationervice Fixed - editorial Line 508: tags or annotations? Fixed - editorial Should example in 3.3 use @Service annotation as well? It does not have to Line 578: Should the componentType have implementation.java tag as it is computed from the java class? No Line 596: Is it possible to get the default value for the field by introspection? No, it isn't - this needs fixing via an issue Line 600: "Component Implementation" spec instead of "Client and Implementation" spec? Yes, Fixed - editorial - also removed reference to "SCA Example Code document" Line 607-608: Not true for Java EE I don't understand this comment. There does not appear to be a problem with those lines. <vamsi> More than one component can use and configure the same implementation, where each component configures the implementation differently. -- More than one component can not use implementation.ejb to configure the same EJB as component implementation </vamsi> Line 609: in xxx.composite is xxx needed? "xxx" indicates that some kind of file name is required <vamsi>Instead of xxx.composite, can we say "a file with .composite extension"? That is what we do for componentType files etc.</vamsi> Section 4.1 name should be Component Implementation? I take the view that this is implied by the Section 4 heading which is "Component" Section 4.2 name should be Component Service? Ditto Section 4.3 name shoulde Component Reference? Ditto Lines 791-792: replace 2 occurrences of "service" with "reference". Fixed - thanks for spotting that - the error was actually in the appendix C section that holds all the normative statements. I will post more comments as I review further. I would like to know if I need to raise NEW ISSUE for some of these. ++Vamsi Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
Next in thread →
Next in month →