OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-assembly message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: eventing - 1.2 wd01 question on use case for a feature.


While reviewing the assembly 1.2 WD 01, I noted an odd detail.
Hopefully, the following question will be immediately obvious to someone
on the TC, but it wasn't to me.

In the bindings section, why in the world does the current draft include
filters as a child element of the binding element, when filters also
appear in the immediate parent - the containing consumer, producer, or
channel?  The text says that they can appear for binding specific
filtering purposes, but I'm absolutely befuddled by what that means, and
what the use-cases might be for this model extension, and I'm concerned
by the increased complexity.

Can anyone tell me what use cases drive this glorious specificity, or
did we just go too far here?

While I'm at it, I have more questions.

The text on binding.sca notes that the filter element must only appear
on bindings specific to channels, producers, and consumers.  The generic
definition of a binding omits this constraint from its description of
the filter element, but that seems like an oversight.

Anyone have insight here?

This last question highlights an interesting detail.  XML Schema has a
perfectly good way of making sure that these elements only appear in the
appropriate place - by using a new base type definition.  So instead of
defining all binding elements as having filters, perhaps we should be
defining an "eventbinding" that adds an optional filter, rather than
repurposing the existing "binding" infrastructure?

-Eric.



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]