[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsn] Draft 2 for issues 3.23, 3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, and 3.28
Lily
I'm sorry it has taken me a time to do this, but I have been through your
changes and I have a few more comments. I've used line numbers from the Sep
15 version.
WSN 3.23
The xsd and wsdl look fine, but the text in section 7.2 shows the element
name for the message as wsn-br:DestroyRegistrationRequest when it should be
wsn-br:DestroyRegistration to match the schema (and the wrapped doc literal
convention we are using for the other operations). I found examples in
lines 685, 687, 694, 72
WSN 3.24
As agreed on the Sep26 call, can you add some words to say that the
CustomerReference EPR MUST be returned if demand is false, and MAY be
returned otherwise. Also, given that it is sometimes a MAY and sometimes a
MUST, I think the "May" in line 496 should be a "may".
WSN 3.28
You have deleted the message for PullNotificationNotSupportedFault
correctly, but unfortunately you deleted the message for
PublisherRegistrationFailedFault at the same time, and this one is needed.
Here's what it should be
<wsdl:message name="PublisherRegistrationFailedFault">
<wsdl:part name="PublisherRegistrationFailedFault"
element="wsn-br:PublisherRegistrationFailedFault"/>
</wsdl:message>
Regards
Peter Niblett
Lily Liu
<lily.liu@webmeth
ods.com> To
David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>, Peter
15/09/2005 18:32 Niblett/UK/IBM@IBMGB,
wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject
[wsn] Draft 2 for issues 3.23,
3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, and 3.28
David, Peter,
Thanks for reviewing the document. Please accept my apology for rushing it
in for review during the f2f.
Here attached is a more complete version, with corrections for all the
issues raised by both of your reviews.
Lily
-----Original Message-----
From: David Hull [mailto:dmh@tibco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:29 PM
To: Peter Niblett; wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsn] Issue verification for 3.23, 3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, and
3.28
I believe I signed up to do this as well, so here's what I came up
with. I apologize in advance for any dumb mistakes herein. It's been a
busy day and my brain is a bit tired.
WSN 3.23 The text as it stands is consistent with the agreed
resolution. However, it might be more consistent overall to rename the
"DestroyRegistration" element "DestroyRegistrationRequest" in the XSD.
WSN 3.24 I thought the agreed approach was to have the second EPR still
be optional in the case of demand-based publishers. The XSD reflects
this, but I didn't see it mentioned in the description around line 529.
I'm guessing I probably missed something, either in the text or the
issues list or both.
WSN 3.25 is OK
WSN 3.26 I don't believe the text mentions that the faults taken from
BaseN are defined there. Also, the WSDL still refers to
"wsn-brw:TopicNotSupportedFault", which (I think) should be wsn-bw instead.
WSN 3.27 is OK
WSN 3.28 I don't see an approach agreed in the issues list, but I may
not have the very latest version. In any case, it appears that the
CreatePullPoint operation is no longer required. This approach would
resolve the issue to my satisfaction. I note, however, that the text
around line 218 still mentions CreatePullPoint as part of
NotficationBroker.
Peter Niblett wrote:
>Lily
>
>Thanks for making these updates. I have reviewed them...
>
>WSN3.23
>- Changes look good, except that you don't have change bars in section
7.2.
>I think we should try to have change bars in our Public Review 2, so that
>the changes since PR1 draft are visible to everyone. So if possible, could
>you insert change bars here.
>
>- One other point I noticed: the [action] URI at line 676 contains a space
>character between brw-1/ and Publisher. This should be removed.
>
>WSN 3.24
>I have a few changes to the text that was included in the issues doc:
>- Line 530 talks about a "NotificationConsumer WS-Resource". I don't think
>there's any need for the thing actually to be a WS-Resource. Could you
>change this to say "NotificationConsumer resource"?
>- Line 532 "Any Notiifications Messages" should be "Any Notification
>Messages".
>- Line 535. Please remove the last sentence (which got into the issues log
>by mistake) "That mechanism is not defined by this specification".
>Also
>- Line 964: ConsumerReference in the XSD should have minOccurs="1" not "0"
>
>WSN 3.25
>
>Verified ok
>
>WSN 3.26
>
>- Lines 1110 - 1118. You should remove the WSDL message definitions for
>these faults.
>- Lines 1229/1231. Need to change these to use wsn-bw: not wsn-brw:
>
>WSN 3.27
>As well as changing the URI, WS-Addressing have moved the schema (putting
a
>ws-addr.xsd into its location). You need to change the schema location at
>line 873 so that it becomes
>schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/ws-addr.xsd";
>
>
>WSN3.28.
>- In line 218 you say that NotificationBroker aggregates the
>CreatePullPoint interface. This should be deleted
>- In line 342 you should say "aggregates the three portTypes" instead of
>"aggregates the four portTypes"
>- Lines 1130-1133 - you should remove the WSDL message definition for the
>PullNotificationNotSupportedFault
>
>
>Also at today's meeting we decided to change all our Namespace URIs,
schema
>locations and [action] MAPs to use -2 instead of -1. So could you change
>all the
>
>http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/b-1 to http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/b-2
>and similarly for bw, br, brw.
>
>
>Thanks
>
>Peter Niblett
>IBM Senior Technical Staff Member
>
>
>
>
> Lily Liu
> <lily.liu@webmeth
> ods.com> To
> wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> 13/09/2005 22:24 cc
>
> Subject
> [wsn] Draft for issues 3.23, 3.24,
> 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, and 3.28
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[attachment "wsn-ws-brokered_notification-1.3-spec-pr-Sept-13.doc" deleted
>by Peter Niblett/UK/IBM]
>
>
>
>
[attachment "wsn-ws-brokered_notification-1.3-spec-pr-Sept-15.doc" deleted
by Peter Niblett/UK/IBM]
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]