RE: [provision] Proposal comparisons...

[Gearard Woods <gewoods@us.ibm.com>]

Jeff,
I don't think you've shown it to be unreliable, you are arguing that it is
unreliable.  What you are arguing here is that changing an identifier
changes identity.  That's fair, but you are again assuming that the only
way to identify a data item is by using all of its state.  My argument is
that in any practical target that is not true and if it were it would be up
to the target to change its schema.  The central issue here is that I do
not wish to place restrictions on the target schema.  Show me a practical
case where you think this is an issue and we can discuss it.  Or, we could
just ask any committee members who feel that they have come across target
where this would be an issue to weigh in.
Gerry



|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           "Jeff Bohren"    |
|         |           <jbohren@opennetw|
|         |           ork.com>         |
|         |                            |
|         |           03/16/2003 06:04 |
|         |           PM               |
|         |                            |
|---------+---------------------------->
  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                              |
  |       To:       Gearard Woods/Irvine/IBM@IBMUS                                                                               |
  |       cc:       <provision@lists.oasis-open.org>                                                                             |
  |       Subject:  RE: [provision] Proposal comparisons...                                                                      |
  |                                                                                                                              |
  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|




Gerry,

This does not address my concerns at all. All you have done is put in the
schema the approach that I have already shown to be unreliable.

If you want to address my concerns, tell me how your proposed solution
would solve the following situation:

Start with the initial data:

<A>

            <B>

                        <C>foo1</C>

                        <C>foo2</C>

                        <C>foo3</C>

            </B>

            <B>

                        <C>foo1</C>

                        <C>foo5</C>

                        <C>foo2</C>

            <B>

</A>



RA1 and RA2 read the data. RA2 changes the 2nd C in the first B to bar1.
Now the data looks like:


<A>

            <B>

                        <C>foo1</C>

                        <C>bar1</C>

                        <C>foo3</C>

            </B>

            <B>

                        <C>foo1</C>

                        <C>foo5</C>

                        <C>foo2</C>

            <B>

</A>

Now RA1 wants to delete the first B. How does RA1 delete the first B, where
B was defined by foo1, foo2, foo3; but is now foo1, bar1, foo3?


Jeff B.

             -----Original Message-----
             From: Gearard Woods [mailto:gewoods@us.ibm.com]
             Sent: Fri 3/14/2003 9:41 PM
             To: Jeff Bohren
             Cc: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
             Subject: Re: [provision] Proposal comparisons...







             Jeff
             To address your concerns about modifcations, I've worked up
yet another
             package.  This does not include a revised scenario but just a
revised
             schema to include the ability to specify modifications with a
level of
             detail comparable to the current SPML proposal.  The revised
schema uses
             XPath to identify the items to be modified, as we have been
discussing.
             Gerry

             (See attached file: scenario.zip)



             |---------+---------------------------->
             |         |           Jeff Bohren      |
             |         |           <jbohren@opennetw|
             |         |           ork.com>         |
             |         |                            |
             |         |           03/13/2003 08:03 |
             |         |           PM               |
             |         |                            |
             |---------+---------------------------->

>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

               |
|
               |       To:       provision@lists.oasis-open.org
|
               |       cc:
|
               |       Subject:  [provision] Proposal comparisons...
|
               |
|

>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





             I am still not satisfied that we understand enough about how
the GW
             proposal would implement modifications in order to make a
proper decisions.
             But I understand we need to close this one way or the other on
Monday, so
             attached is my summary of how the two approaches compare.

             I will be out of the office on Fri, and will be unable to
discuss these
             issues further until Mon.

             Jeff Bohren
              OpenNetwork Technologies



             #### Proposal_Evaluation_01.doc has been removed from this
note on March
             14, 2003 by Gearard Woods






----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>