muws-xs:ManageabilityEndpointReference is an element in MUWS defined in
Relationships for a muws-xs:Participant. I earlier asked it to be a GED so that
we can reuse it in places we need. This is one of such examples where this
element should be ref'ed.
IMO, component address itself should be an optional element. Even if a
component is addressable the event reported may not know ir be able to represent
such address in XML.
-----Original Message-----
From: Vambenepe,
William N [mailto:vbp@hp.com]
Sent: Thu 11/18/2004 4:08 AM
To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc:
Subject:
RE: [wsdm] Is componentAddress required?
And yes I noticed that the spec says "This is a REQUIRED
property if the
component is addressable" but this really doesn't mean
anything.
Anything one can talk about is addressable by some (potentially
yet to
be invented) addressing scheme.
Also, I need an explanation
of this:
ManagementEvent/sourceComponentId/componentAddress/{any} - XML
open
contents to include any XML representation of the component address.
The
commonly used addresses are either basic Web service
address,
wsa:EndpointAddress, or the address of a manageable
resource,
muws:ManageabilityEndpointReference.
AFAIK (and I should
know), there is no ManageabilityEndpointReference in
MUWS.
Also, I
have a remark about this
definition:
ManagementEvent/reporterComponentId - this is the
identification of the
component that is the "reporter" of the event or the
situation. This is
a REQUIRED property only if the reporting component is
different than
the source component. Otherwise, this element is OPTIONAL.
This element
is of the same XML Schema complex type as
the
ManagementEvent/sourceComponentId element.
Does this mean that
if I don't see a reporterComponentId I know that the
reporter is the same
as the source? What about the case where the
reporter doesn't want to (or
doesn't have a way to) report who it is but
is still different from the
source? I don't think we should assume that
no reporter means
reporter=source.
BTW I took the liberty to rename sourceComponentId
and
reporterComponentId to sourceComponent and reporterComponent because
one
common case is when this contains an EPR and, as Francisco Curbera
very
pointedly explained on the WS-Addressing mailing list an EPR is not
an
Id
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0355.h
tml).
Let me know if this is a problem.
William
-----Original
Message-----
From: Vambenepe, William N
Sent: Thursday, November 18,
2004 12:22 AM
To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsdm] Is
componentAddress required?
The pseudo-schema and the UML show that
componentAddress (inside
sourceComponentId or reporterComponentId) is
optional (0 to unbounded)
but the current description says it's required.
Which one is right.
I think it should be optional. It's ok if I only
want to send the
ResourceId.
William
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/wsdm/members/leave_workgrou
p.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/wsdm/members/leave_workgroup.php.