Re: [Issue 82] NEW ISSUE: Relax <component/> schema to allow <implementation/>anywhere

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

I've always wondered why we have that choice. Apologies, if this was 
discussed before and I have forgotten the reason.
What's wrong with saying:
<sequence>
   <implementation />
   <service minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
   <reference minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
   <property minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
   <any minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>

Doesn't that make the UPA problem more manageable?
OR what is the advantage of allowing service/ref/prop to occur in any order?

-Anish
--

David Booz wrote:
> TARGET: Any version of the Assembly spec
> 
> DESCRIPTION:
> The schema for <component/> and others requires <implementation/> to be 
> the first child. This seems overly restrictive and should be relaxed.
> 
> PROPOSAL:
> Move the <implementation/> element inside the <choice/> containing 
> <service/>, <reference/> and <property/>.
> 
> 
> Dave Booz
> STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
> Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC
> "Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
> Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
> e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com
>