Re: [sca-assembly] [ISSUE 117] Definition of compatible superset and subset- Updated Proposal

[Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>]

Folks,

Responses to Simon's points are inline
below.

An updated version of the proposal is
uploaded here:

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/32053/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%2BIssue117b.doc
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/32054/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%2BIssue117b.pdf

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:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

From:	Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>
To:	sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:	05/04/2009 23:57
Subject:	Re: [sca-assembly] [ISSUE 117] Definition of compatible superset and subset - Updated Proposal

---

Mike,
Here are my comments on the 117a document.  (Line numbers refer to
the PDF).

  1. Line 1259: It is not necessary for all the promoted references
     to be compatible with each other.  It is only necessary
that each
     of their interfaces is a compatible subset of the composite
     reference interface (see line 1417).
<mje>Reworded</mje>

  2. Line 1473: This wording implies that if the composite reference
     does not have an interface, the interface of one of the
promoted
     component references can be used if it's either the same
as or a
     compatible superset of the other promoted component references
     (i.e., it would be possible for the interfaces to not all
be the
     same.)  However, according to lines 1415/1416 these
interfaces
     would have to all be the same, because there was no interface
     specified on the composite reference.
<mje>reworded</mje>

  3. Line 1768: The requirement should not be for the target to have
     one service with a compatible interface.  As in line
1757, it should
     only have one service that is a compatible superset of the
interface
     on the wire source.
<mje>Reworded</mje>

  4. Line 2312: This talks about the component configuration and the
     component implementation "conforming" to the constrainingType.
     I think this is anpther place where we need to add language
talking
     about compatible subsets or supersets.
<mje>Added a new normative statement
[ASM70007] which requires interface compatibility
- I don't think that subset/superset is appropriate
here. </mje>

  5. Line 2603: ASM80012 is a duplicate of ASM50004.
<mje>Removed ASM80012, reworded ASM50004
to match ASM50011</mje>

  6. Line 2606: ASM80018 is a duplicate of ASM50011.
<mje>Removed ASM80018</mje>

  7. Line 2609: ASM80013 isn't needed because the definition of compatible
     subset and superset implies that callback interfaces will
be consistent.
<mje>Removed ASM80013</mje>


  8. Line 2613: ASM80014 is a duplicate of ASM60005.
<mje>Removed ASM80014</mje>

  9. Line 2615: ASM80019 is a duplicate of ASM60008.
<mje>Removed ASM80019</mje>

10. Line 2617: ASM80015 isn't needed because the definition of compatible
     subset and superset implies that callback interfaces will
be consistent.
<mje>Removed ASM80015</mje>

   Simon

Mike Edwards wrote:
> 
> Dave,
> 
> Many thanks for the review
> 
> *Updated proposal here:*
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/31877/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%2BIssue117a.pdf
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/31876/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%2BIssue117a.doc
> 
> 
> 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:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
> 
> 
> From:                
 David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>
> To:                
 sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
> Date:                
 31/03/2009 14:54
> Subject:              
   Re: [sca-assembly] [ISSUE 117] Definition of compatible
> superset and subset - Updated Proposal
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Some comments based on a search of the proposal document for the word
> compatible:
> 
> line 1259: I think this is ok as it is.
> *Agreed*
> line 1757, 1767: I think these should say compatible superset
> *Agreed*
> line 1885: This is a bit awkward because ASM60022 uses the new 
> "compatible interface" term and then re-defines the term
in ASM60023. It 
> might be more clear to rework ASM60022 to use the term compatible
> superset, then we could get rid of ASM60022.
> *Agreed - see if you like my new wording*
> line 2603: seems ok as it is
> *OK*
> line 2607 and 2614: should be compatible superset as per ASM50004
on 
> line 741.
> *Hmm - a bit messy.  See if you like my new approach here.*
> line 2618 needs to be updated to point to section 7.2.
> *Good catch*
> line 2504: Is there a reason why #5 is not combined with #3 on line
2499?
> *Yes - see what happens for superset and subset*
> *I intended the 3 cases to run parallel to each other...*
> ---------------
> As as aside, line 1035 talks about property type compatibility, which
> might need some work? If you agree, I'll open a new issue.
> *Yep, that's a new issue  :-(*
> 
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> 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:booz@us.ibm.com
> 
> Inactive hide details for Mike Edwards ---03/31/2009 08:47:08 
> AM---Folks, Here is an updated proposal in the form of a change mMike
> Edwards ---03/31/2009 08:47:08 AM---Folks, Here is an updated proposal
> in the form of a change marked version built
> 
> From:                
 
> Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
> 
> To:                
 
> "OASIS Assembly" <sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Date:                
 
> 03/31/2009 08:47 AM
> 
> Subject:              
   
> [sca-assembly] [ISSUE 117] Definition of compatible superset and subset
> - Updated Proposal
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> Here is an updated proposal in the form of a change marked version
built 
> from CD03.
> 
> This proposal creates formal definitions of Compatible interfaces,
> Compatible superset interface
> and Compatible subset interfaces. It then adjusts relevant parts of
the 
> specification to use those
> terms. _
> __
> __http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/31875/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%20Issue117.pdf_
> _
> __http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/31874/sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03%20Issue117.doc_
> 
> 
> I note that this proposal also resolves Issue 116 since it defines
how 
> interfaces are compared.
> 
> 
> 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: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> /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