I believe this should be raised as an
issue for SCA-J. There is some chance that conversation attributes should map
to policy sets rather than to new assembly model constructs, so I would hold
off on raising this as an issue to another TC until we have an idea of who
should get it.
Michael
From: Bryan
Aupperle [mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007
10:03 AM
To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [sca-j]
@ConversationAttributes
I was looking at the annotations related to
conversations in the initial working draft of the Java Common Annotations and
APIs Specification and the Java schemas in the initial working draft of the
Assembly Model Specification and noticed that there is nothing in the schema
corresponding to the conversation attributes defined by the
@ConversationAttributes. Am I misreading something, is this intentional,
or is there something missing from the schema?
I
was prompted to look at this by reviewing the conversation related annotations
for C++ and C and noticing some differences. My concern is primarily that
we do things with appropriate consistency across the various languages.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Master Inventor
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com