[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm][OMod] Updated Mows data model with versioning
Brian,
On 1. I wanted to express that there could be many itemized
descriptions that are aggregated into a revision. As far as I know some change
management systems actualy do it that way. I don't think it hurts this way. The
UML says that aggegation and a typed property are conceptually expressing the
same sort of relationship.
On 2.
There is no 1-1 mapping between documents and instances of services, etc.
documents are merely used as artifacts that decsribe those, they are orthogonal.
targetNamespace delares where does the described element belong to, this has
nothing to do with the document in which the description is expressed. That
document itself will always have the same standard (WSDL) namespace, but
targetNamespaces will be different.
Then,
there is onwership of the namespace, but the namespace of an element itself
expresses "belonginess", not precisely ownership. targetNamespace is only used
in XML Schema and WSDL documents to represent "belonginess" of the concepts
being defined there. This is a markup that needs to be translated into the
actual concepts (which may be unique and owned).
We can
move that namespace statement to the end and have the concept definitions
upfront. I can try to rephrase it. I really want to keep the practical
reference instead of merely waving our hands in the air. Someone has to
understand how this works and it has to be a common
practice.
We'll
discuss this on the [Omod] call today.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com) From: Brian Carroll [mailto:Brian.Carroll@merant.com] Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 2:28 AM To: Sedukhin, Igor S; 'wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org' Subject: RE: [wsdm][OMod] Updated Mows data model with versioning Igor,
I
apologize, but again have conflicting meetings and will miss the the Thursday
call tomorrow.
I am
substantially in agreement with your diagram. I believe it is more
important that the versioning concepts are expressible in the MOWS model than we
agree on the details of the model. I do have
a few observations:
1. It
is not clear why Description need to be a separate entity rather than simply an
attribute of Interface and Service. I realize whether a characteristic of
an entity type is expressed as an attribute or an associated entity is a choice
that largely depends on a modelers's style. But in this diagram, treating
Description as an attribute would seem to simplify the diagram. For
example, we would not need the Description Version entity type if we expressed
Descrption as an attribute of the Interface and Service entity
types.
2. I
have serious concerns over the use of targetNamespace as the version
identifier. targetNamespaces are associated with XML documents and it
is not clear there will always be a 1-1 mapping between XML documents (e.g the
WSDL document instances) and the instances of the entity types Interface and
Service. Also, there are more philosophical concerns about the use of
namespace. For example, namespaces were intended to express the notion of
"ownership" (my namespace vs your namespace), not versioning. I admit that
they namespaces have been hijacked as a convenient place to add version
information - a common practice, but one that may not be well advised. A
better approach would be to treat ownership and versioning as orthogonal
concepts and use a separate element.attribute for each.
Regards,
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:31 AM To: Brian Carroll; wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org; Andreas Dharmawan Subject: RE: [wsdm][OMod] Updated Mows data model with versioning
Notice: This email transmission and/or the attachments accompanying it may contain confidential information belonging to Merant. The information is only for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email, and then destroy all copies of the transmission. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]