Re: [sca-bindings] Re: Issue BINDINGS-107

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

Fine with me as well.

-Anish
--

On 11/18/2009 4:59 AM, Mike Edwards wrote:
> 
> My +1 too.
> 
> 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-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
> Date: 	18/11/2009 12:47
> Subject: 	Re: [sca-bindings] Re: Issue BINDINGS-107
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> +1 If it turns out that standardizing such a mechanism does become 
> something of great utility, we can easily add it in a future version 
> without breaking anything. Plus we'd have some real use cases on which 
> to base the design.
> 
> 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 Simon Holdsworth ---11/18/2009 06:06:04 
> AM---Folks, here's my opinion on BINDINGS-107, I'd appreciateSimon 
> Holdsworth ---11/18/2009 06:06:04 AM---Folks, here's my opinion on 
> BINDINGS-107, I'd appreciate your comments/opinions.
> 
> From: 	
> Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>
> 
> To: 	
> sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
> Date: 	
> 11/18/2009 06:06 AM
> 
> Subject: 	
> [sca-bindings] Re: Issue BINDINGS-107
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Folks, here's my opinion on BINDINGS-107, I'd appreciate your 
> comments/opinions.
> 
> The main purpose of having JMS and JCA binding elements in the 
> definitions file is to allow a single JMS/JCA application to be accessed 
> from several SCA references or services without having to duplicate all 
> the details of connection and operation mapping. That's primarily due to 
> the fact that there's no standard service definition for JMS/JCA 
> applications. Typically for service bindings, the information is going 
> to be specific to each exposed service so I would expect such sharing to 
> be mainly but not exclusively used for references.
> 
> There's no functional reason why we require this mechanism. If we remove 
> it from the spec it doesn't reduce the capability of the bindings, it 
> just means that SCA runtimes would possibly need to provide their own 
> way of managing sharing of such information outside of the standard 
> definitions. Given that this is not a portability/interop requirement 
> I'd say its not that high a priority to be standardised. If we feel that 
> the additional complexity that this brings to the JMS and JCA bindings 
> specs is not justified, then I don't feel particularly strongly about 
> removing it.
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> /
> /
> 
> /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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>