Re: [wsrf] Groups - AppnotesIssuesApril05_draft (DraftAppNotesIssues63_95_22_52_89.doc) uploaded

[Ian Robinson <ian_robinson@uk.ibm.com>]

Katy, some comments:

Line 30: actually, it will be the new fault to be defined by the resolution
to WSRF102 that should be returned if the operation would cause the RPDoc
to no longer validate.

Line 60: In order to query <add>attributes of resource properties</add> a
WS-Resource client must...

Lines 98/99: I would suggest re-wording as follows: "In order to ensure
interoperability of WS-RF implementations, WS-RF applications should use a
document-literal binding to serialize the messages defined by the WS-RF
specifications. "  (We shouldn't make any comment on application design
outside the scope of how it supports WS-RF).

Section 1.5.2: I'm not sure the example properly illustrates why we have
the restriction on GEDs - there is no actual problem with the use of
tns:Size as described - the <Size> child of <Blocks> is a part of the
<Blocks> RP - it is not an RP in itself. And both <tns:Szie> and
<tns:Blocks> are uniquely defined by qnames in this example. The problem
would come if a new resource properties document needed to be specified
that composed GenericDiskDriveProperties with another resource properties
document in a new namespace. A GED allows an element to be easily mixed in
without having to reproduce the type definition in the new namespace.

Do we need section 1.5.3? Was there a specific issue that motivates this?
Is there any reason to suppose a resource property document could not  be
extended in the normal fashion described by XML schema (as illustrated
here)?

Regards,
Ian Robinson
STSM, WebSphere Messaging and Transactions Architect
IBM Hursley Lab, UK
ian_robinson@uk.ibm.com


                                                                           
             Katy                                                          
             Warr/UK/IBM@IBMGB                                             
                                                                        To 
             21/04/2005 10:39          wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org           
                                                                        cc 
                                                                           
                                                                   Subject 
                                       [wsrf] Groups -                     
                                       AppnotesIssuesApril05_draft         
                                       (DraftAppNotesIssues63_95_22_52_89. 
                                       doc) uploaded                       
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




This document contains proposed appnotes for issues 63,95, 22,52,89.

Please review and send comments to the group.  I will incorporate the notes
into the appnotes document next week.
Thanks
Katy

 -- Ms Katy Warr

The document named AppnotesIssuesApril05_draft
(DraftAppNotesIssues63_95_22_52_89.doc) has been submitted by Ms Katy Warr
to the OASIS Web Services Resource Framework (WSRF) TC document
repository.

Document Description:
Proposed resolution for the following appnotes:
WSRF63: Which lifetime attributes (ala OGSI) should be specified for
resource properties
WSRF95: Rules for defining resource properties document
WSRF22: QNames as attribute values or text nodes is problematic with
signatures/encryption and intermediaries
WSRF52: Delete will always fault if minOccurs > 0
WSRF89: Document-literal serialization

View Document Details:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/document.php?document_id=12346


Download Document:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/download.php/12346/DraftAppNotesIssues63_95_22_52_89.doc



PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email
application
may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and
paste
the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.

-OASIS Open Administration