Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [sca-assembly] ISSUE-137: Clarify the use of a binding name in areference target - proposal (c)
Simon, Thanks for clarifying your point. I was certainly aware of the impact of this change. In the past we didn't have interface compatibility rules on which to base this sort of capability, nor did we have the effects of policy well understood. Taking into account the subtle nature of this, I'm now wondering if I should change the second bullet (which describes <service-name>) to an RFC2119 statement, similar to the last paragraph of the 3rd bullet. Dave Booz STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 e-mail: Simon Nash ---07/01/2009 04:53:04 PM---Dave, I'm sorry that we ran out of time on Tuesday's call before we could From: Simon Nash <> To: David Booz/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS Cc: Date: 07/01/2009 04:53 PM Subject: Re: [sca-assembly] ISSUE-137: Clarify the use of a binding name in a reference target - proposal (c) Dave, I'm sorry that we ran out of time on Tuesday's call before we could finish the discussion of policy matching for target URIs. In an attempt to save time on next week's call, I'll summarize my point here. I hope this clarifies things rather than making the discussion even more confused! From the spec words before proposal 137c, it was only valid to omit the <service-name> if there was exactly one compatible service on the component. So, if a component MyComp has services "Foo" and "Bar", and the interfaces of "Foo" and "Bar" are both compatible with the reference interface, it would be necessary to specify either "MyComp/Foo" or "MyComp/Bar" explicitly in the reference URI instead of just "MyComp". This is irrespective of whether polices match or don't match, because policy matching is not part of the definition of interface compatibilty. The wiring rules require interface compatibility, and they also require matching policies on reference and service. So if "Foo" has matching policies and "Bar" does not, the target "MyComp/Foo" would be OK and the target "MyComp/Bar" would be an error. The 137c proposal would make one change to this: it would make "MyComp" a valid shorthand for "MyComp/Foo" based on the additional policy matching rule. It would leave the other cases as before, with "MyComp/Foo" being OK and "MyComp/Bar" being an error. If you (or others) interpreted the previous words as allowing "MyComp" in this case, then the new words are equivalent and clearer. If anyone interpreted the previous words as not allowing "MyComp" in ths case (as I did), then the new words would change this. However, I don't object to making this change. One point in its favour is that the rule stated in the new words is consistent with how autowiring works. Simon Mike Edwards wrote: > > Folks, > > This looks good to me. > > +1 > > 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: David Booz <> > To: > Date: 29/06/2009 21:05 > Subject: [sca-assembly] ISSUE-137: Clarify the use of a binding name in > a reference target - proposal (c) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Attached is the updated proposal for ASSEMBLY-137. I believe all > comments from the last telecon are addressed, and in addition I found > several additional places (as I suspected) which also needed a minor update. > / > (See attached file: sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03+issue137c.doc)/ > > [1] _http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-137_ > > Dave Booz > STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture > Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC > "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" > Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 > e-mail:[attachment > "sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03+issue137c.doc" deleted by Mike > Edwards/UK/IBM] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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/ > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
Next in thread →
Next in month →