Updated proposal for issue BINDINGS-40

[Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>]

I propose that we resolve issue BINDINGS-40
as follows: 

This proposed resolution applies to
JMS binding spec cd01-rev3

-------------------------------------------------

1) ConnectionFactory and ActivationSpec are mutually exclusive within a
<binding.jms> or <response> element. 
This is reflected in the text, but not in the schema.  

Update the schema for the binding.jms
element to put the CF and AS in a choice element (note this includes the
fact that destination is mandatory for a connection factory, optional for
an activation spec):

<sequence>
   ...
   <choice minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="1"> 
        <sequence>
        <element name="destination"
type="sca:Destination"/> 
        <element name="connectionFactory"
type="sca:ConnectionFactory"/> 
        </sequence>
         <sequence>
        <element name="destination"
type="sca:Destination" minOccurs="0"/>
        <element name="activationSpec"
type="sca:ActivationSpec"/> 
      </sequence> 
   </choice>  
 
   ...

Update the schema for the Response element
to put the CF and AS in a choice element (in this case Destination is optional
for both CF and AS):

<complexType name="Response">
   <sequence>
      <element name="destination" type="sca:Destination"
minOccurs="0"/> 
      <choice minOccurs="0">
         <element
name="connectionFactory" type="sca:ConnectionFactory"/>
         <element
name="activationSpec" type="sca:ActivationSpec"/>

      </choice>
   </sequence>
</complexType> 

2) When specifying a ConnectionFactory in a <binding.jms> element,
the Destination is mandatory. 
This is not reflected. Update required: 

line 183 add: "When this element is present, the destination
element MUST also be present" 

Schema update as above

3) When specifying a ConnectionFactory in a <response> element, the
Destination is optional. 
This is implicit, although the meaning of the destination is not clear.
Need to add some clarification: 

line 189 add: "for a service, this destination is used to send response
to messages that have a null value for the JMSReplyTo destination. For
a reference, this destination is used to receive reply messages".

Note that the RFC language that describes this is included in the message
exchange patterns section. 

Don't need any XML schema update for this as Destination is already optional.

4) When specifying an ActivationSpec, Destination is optional; when creating
resources if not specified the system provides a Destination, otherwise
if specified must be consistent with the ActivationSpec. 

line 184 and 195 add: "If a destination element is also
specified it MUST refer to the same JMS destination as the activationSpec.
"

XML schema cannot enforce this rule as it cannot see within the activationSpec
properties. 

5) A service <response> must not specify an ActivationSpec; a reference
<binding.jms> must not specify an ActivationSpec. 
(I don't believe XML schema can enforce this as it cannot know whether
the binding is applied to a reference or service.)

line 184 add: This element MUST NOT be present when the binding is being
used for an SCA reference. 

line 195 add: This element MUST NOT be present when the binding is being
used for an SCA service. 

-------------------------------------------------

Regards, Simon 

Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet - Simon_Holdsworth@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