[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 6: JMS bindingType and conversation intent
Hi Michael, Ok, in that case this issue should stay as well (conversation --> conversational). And we can apply for the title of smallest change due to one issue. Peter -----Original Message----- From: Michael Rowley [mailto:mrowley@bea.com] Sent: Monday, 8. October 2007 18:37 To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 6: JMS bindingType and conversation intent The intent should be called "conversational", rather than "conversation". You are right that it isn't defined in the policy spec, but is rather defined in the assembly spec (line 817 of the input spec). The semantics of an intent specified on an interface is found on line 902 of that specification -- it translates into required intents on any service or reference that uses that interface. This definition should be in the policy spec, not the assembly spec. I'll raise an issue in the Policy TC. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Eric Johnson [mailto:eric@tibco.com] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:40 PM To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 6: JMS bindingType and conversation intent Logged as http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-6 Peshev, Peter wrote: > TARGET: > JMS Binding Specification Version 1.1, Working Draft 25 September 2007 > > > DESCRIPTION: > > The current bindingType of the jms is defined as : > > <bindingType type="binding.jms" alwaysProvides="jms" > mayProvide="atLeastOnce atMostOnce ordered conversation"/> > > I couldn't find the conversation intent in the policy spec. Is this an > issue for the policy TC or perhaps should be removed from here ? > > > PROPOSED SOLUTION > Drop it > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]