RE: [uddi-spec] Groups - uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.docuploaded

[Tom Bellwood <bellwood@us.ibm.com>]

Hi Matthew,

I agree that there is redundancy between the first two scenarios you list, but I'm not sure I like getting rid of it entirely if that means we leave things simpler to use. I can probably be convinced by strong opinions here though. Regarding scenario 3, ("Using a range with upperEndpoint=10 and another range with lowerEndpoint=20 in a conjunctive OR"), this doesn't make sense to me.  I define a lowerEndpoint to always be <= upperEndpoint, at least that was the intention, hence the need to allow inversion of the criteria (by some means), which would yield a criteria outside these bounds.  Allowing the transposition of lower and upper bounds does not seem intuitive behavior to me, so I would submit that this scenario should be considered invalid.  Do you agree?

Thanks,
Tom Bellwood Phone: (512) 838-9957 (external); TL: 678/9957 (internal)
IBM Digital Media Standards Project Office Lead
Co-Chair, OASIS UDDI Specification TC
STSM - Emerging Technologies
IBM Corporation

To: "Matthew J. Dovey" <matthew.dovey@oucs.ox.ac.uk>, Tom Bellwood/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc: <uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Groups - uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc uploaded



Its been pointed out that I didn't elaborate the point behind my
question.

Whilst I don't see any problem in alternative ways of expressing the
same thing, there isn't any reason to add new ways unnecessarily. So
whilst it is fine to have the latter two as alternates (since we use
NotOperands elsewhere), I can't see the purpose of also having the first
one. i.e. unless I've missed some subtlety, I can't see the need for the
inverted attribute.

Matthew

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew J. Dovey
> [mailto:matthew.dovey@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk]
> Sent: 26 February 2004 09:51
> To: Tom Bellwood
> Cc: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Groups -
> uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc uploaded
>
> Reviewing this, can you clarify what the difference is between
>
> Using a range of lowerEndpoint=10 and upperEndpoint=20 with
> the inverted attribute=true
>
> Using a range of lowerEndpoint=10
> and upperEndpoint=20 with the inverted attribute=false using
> find_tModelNotOperands
>
> Using a range with upperEndpoint=10
> and another range with lowerEndpoint=20 in a conjunctive OR
>
> (Of course the inclusive/exclusive attribute would need to be set
> accordingly)
>
> Matthew
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Bellwood [mailto:bellwood@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: 11 February 2004 18:57
> > To: Matthew J. Dovey
> > Cc: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Groups -
> > uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc uploaded
> >
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> > We've adopted your suggestion during today's FTF discussion.
> > The next version posted will have that update.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tom Bellwood Phone: (512) 838-9957 (external); TL: 678/9957
> > (internal) IBM Digital Media Standards Project Office Lead
> Co-Chair,
> > OASIS UDDI Specification TC STSM - Emerging Technologies IBM
> > Corporation
> >
> >
> > To: Tom Bellwood/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
> > cc: <uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Groups -
> > uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc uploaded
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom,
> >
> > Thanks for picking this up - I'm afraid my attention has
> been diverted
> > at present!
> >
> > "Note that a rangeMatch element must include either an
> upperEndpoint,
> > lowerEndpoint, or both" - do we need to say this. A range with no
> > endpoints would match everything (an inverted range with no
> endpoints
> > would match nothing).
> >
> > Rather than have an upperEndpointOperator (and
> lowerEndpointOperator),
> > how about a boolean inclusive=true/false (or exclusive=true/false).
> > That way we can have the same type (endpoint) for both
> upper and lower
> > endpoints.
> >
> > Matthew
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: bellwood@us.ibm.com [mailto:bellwood@us.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: 10 February 2004 15:22
> > > To: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: [uddi-spec] Groups -
> > > uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc uploaded
> > >
> > > The document
> > > uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc has been
> > > submitted by Tom Bellwood (bellwood@us.ibm.com) to the OASIS UDDI
> > > Specification TC document repository.
> > >
> > > Document Description:
> > > I've been trying to post this doc for a couple days w/o success.
> > > Sorry.  It's a first crack at solving Req 23.
> > > Comments please.
> > >
> > > Download Document:
> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/downloa
> > d.php/5395/uddi-spec-tc-prop023-keyedReferenceGroup-20040209.doc
> > >
> > > View Document Details:
> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/documen
> > t.php?document_id=5395
> > >
> > >
> > > PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email
> > > application may be breaking the link into two pieces.
> > > You may be able to copy and paste the entire link address
> into the
> > > address field of your web browser.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
> > > roster of the OASIS TC), go to
> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members
> > /leave_workgroup.php.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from
> the roster of the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members
/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgroup.php.