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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-bindings message

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


Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 124 proposal version 2


Commenting only on:

>> * wrt Dave's comment about BWS5005/7, I'm not sure what needs to change.

I added a sentence at the beginning of section 5.1 that says that WSCB
service implements the forward interface and the WSCB client implements
the callback interface.

The conundrum that I see is the conflation of runtime and application
responsibilities depending on the perspective from which you read section
5.  Let's start with the text in BWS50005 as Anish has currently written
it.

BWS50005: When the WSCB Service invokes the callback interface, it MUST use
the Callback EPR from a request message that invoked the forward interface.

Earlier in that section, WSCB Service is defined as: a Service that
implements the SCA bidirectional interface using Web services (WSCB
Service)

In the SCA world, the thing that implements the bidirectional SCA interface
is an application, not the runtime.  When the term WSCB Service is used in
BWS50005 within the context of an SCA world, then I argue that BWS50005
doesn't make any sense because BWS50005 is giving instructions to a runtime
not to an application, yet the definition of WSCB service is pointing to an
application.

However, in the non-SCA world, the definition of WSCB Service seems
reasonable because outside the scope of SCA the separation between runtime
and application is unknown, and in fact one of those two concepts might not
even exist. As a result, BWS50005 seems fine when read in a non-SCA
context.

Given that we want non-SCA runtime providers to be able to implement this
protocol without getting confused about what and who implements each piece
of it, then I suggest that what Anish has written in section 5 is fine.
What we need is another section which can put section 5 into context for an
SCA runtime, that is, an SCA centric perspective on section 5.  Anish,
originally I had thought that you intended to provide this context within
section 6.  I don't see it there, and I don't see it addressed anywhere
else.  Perhaps I just missed it.


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


|------------>
| From:      |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>                                                                                                      |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| To:        |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org                                                                                                                 |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Date:      |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |03/24/2010 05:54 PM                                                                                                                               |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Subject:   |
|------------>
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 124 proposal version 2                                                                                                   |
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





Version 2 based on feedback from last week's call is attached.

* Fixed editorial bugs pointed out by EricJ in section 6.

* I did some due diligence on the question of whether creating
independent conformance points for WSCB service/client results in a
problem (as pointed out by EricJ), since the other non-section5
conformance items are no longer applicable to WSCB service/client. I
found 5 assertions that are somewhat related (noted below). The others
are about binding.ws syntactic elements/attributes or something similar.

a) there is MUST for SOAP 1.1 and a SHOULD for SOAP 1.2. Section 5 also
talks in several places about SOAP header blocks. Strictly speaking
there is no necessity to require SOAP (1.1 or 1.2) for this protocol. It
could depend only on WS-Addressing. But that is a separate issue. To fix
this, I have changed the intro to 5.1 to state that this is a
soap/ws-addressing based protocol. I didn't see a reason to introduce
assertions for requiring SOAP/WS-A. It is required by definition. But if
ppl feel strongly we can introduce new conformance items.

b) There is a requirement for conforming to SCA assembly and policy. I
don't think this is needed (it would defeat the purpose of the issue
itself).

c) There is a SHOULD for http endpoints to provide a wsdl description
when queried with ?wsdl and a SHOULD for non http endpoints to provide
some way to obtain the WSDL descriptions. I didn't see a need to have
this requirement on WSCB service/client endpoints. I see this as a SCA
runtime requirement not a protocol requirement.

* wrt Dave's comment about BWS5005/7, I'm not sure what needs to change.
I added a sentence at the beginning of section 5.1 that says that WSCB
service implements the forward interface and the WSCB client implements
the callback interface.

Comments?

-Anish
--

On 3/18/2010 9:01 AM, Anish Karmarkar wrote:
> Proposal for issue 124 as outlined in [1] is attached.
>
> -Anish
> --
>
> [1]
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201003/msg00000.html
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
[attachment "sca-wsbinding-1.1-spec-cd03-rev2_issue124v2.doc" deleted by
David Booz/Poughkeepsie/IBM] [attachment
"sca-wsbinding-1.1-spec-cd03-rev2_issue124v2.pdf" deleted by David
Booz/Poughkeepsie/IBM]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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




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