[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] [I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()?
Why are we struggling to with abstract names? How about using something concrete and related to what we are trying to define? I believe 'portlet' is a widely used term in the portal world regardless of the specific technology. What do you think about using 'portlet type' and 'portlet'? Alejandro Monica Martin wrote: > Just a thought....in another development specification I participate in > they differentiate the entity/instance in this way: > > Structure: Entity type > Instance: Entity > > Entity and entity type are used. This doesn't answer the question on > 'session' however. > > Monica > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 7:50 AM > To: Gil Tayar; wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] [I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? > > > The very last thing we can afford is any potential confusion about > our specification in an already crowded marketplace. I would prefer a > term that we could use and own that it would not be possible to > misconstrue or transpose between applications. Lacking that I think > we should use a prefix and ultraverbose naming convention a la > wsrp-wsia:serviceEntityReferenceHandle--that is an extreme and > not-serious example to illustrate a point. > > We still have to sell this, and confusing terminology, or even > terminology which is likely to be confusing in practice probably > won't fly. That has always been the problem with Instance, Session, > et al. At some point, though, we will have to decide on something. > I'm just not sure what it should be. Would it be beyond the bounds to > simply invent something like: servsession? > > Ciao, > Rex > At 3:05 PM +0200 10/9/02, Gil Tayar wrote: > >>In case somebody doesn't want to implement it, they can always do an > > "empty" > >>implementation - just like in in the "initEnvironment" operation. >> >>I think the arguments for it being _in_ the markup are stronger. > > Anybody > >>object? >> >>Gil >>P.S. Having a thing implemented differently does not mean that a >>_conceptual_ model of this thing shouldn't be defined. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] >>Sent: Wed, October 09, 2002 14:58 >>To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org >>Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] [I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Of course the reason we haven't named it is that different > > implementations > >>will us it differently: >> - OO-style => really a runtime instance of the entity with various >>instance variables >> - Servlet-style => really a reference to the servlet + a reference to > > a > >>transient session >> >>Both of these are transient runtime refinements on the entity, but > > neither > >>instance nor session are accurate descriptions of both. >> >>My primary argument for releaseRefHandle() being in the Markup factor >>derives from the operations that can return a refHandle are in that > > factor. > >>The arguments against are that it should be optional (& this is a > > required > >>factor) and that it is a lifecycle management operation rather than a >>markup oriented operation. I would be ok with it in either factor > > though. > >> >> >> >> >> Gil Tayar >> >> <Gil.Tayar@webcol To: >>"'wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org'" >> lage.com> >><wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org> >> cc: >> >> 10/09/2002 08:26 Subject: RE: > > [wsrp-wsia] > >>[I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? >> AM >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>The operation is not really about managing entities. It is about > > managing > >>the >>yet-to-be-named-lets-see-if-we-can-live-without-a-name-for-it-and-which > > -I-am > >>-not-allowed-to-call-an-instance which is the runtime manifestation of > > an > >>entity, whose handle can be "by chance" a handle to an entity. >> >>As such, it has to be in the Markup interface, because that is the > > _only_ > >>interface which deals with the >>yet-to-be-named-lets-see-if-we-can-live-without-a-name-for-it-and-which > > -I-am > >>-not-allowed-to-call-an-instance. >> >>To prove this: let's say I do not implement the Entity Management >>interface. >>Would I maybe want to implement the releaseRefHandle? The answer, > > IMNSHO, > >>is >>a resounding "Yes!" - I would like to enable the Consumer to tell me > > when > >>it's finished with my >>yet-to-be-named-lets-see-if-we-can-live-without-a-name-for-it-and-which > > -I-am > >>-not-allowed-to-call-an-instance. >> >>The other case (let's for a second assume I am able not to implement > > the > >>Markup interface) - if I do not implement Markup, but implement Entity >>Management. Would I need to implement releseRefHandle()? The answer, >>IMNSHO, >>is an emphatic "No!" - all my "release"-ment needs are resolved by >>releaseEntityHandle(). >> >>Humorously yours, >>Gil >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] >>Sent: Wed, October 09, 2002 14:13 >>To: Gil Tayar >>Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] [I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>I went back and forth between these two when submitting the > > recommendation. > >>I finally came down on the Entity Management side as the operation > > really > >>is about managing entities (in this case transient refinements on an >>entity). Also, the Markup factor is required of all Producers and this >>clearly is not a required operation (can always just let things time > > out). > >> >> >> >> >> Gil Tayar >> >> <Gil.Tayar@webcol To: >>wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org >> lage.com> cc: >> >> Subject: RE: > > [wsrp-wsia] > >>[I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? >> 10/09/2002 12:39 >> >> AM >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Rich, >>I agree, but I think it should be in the Markup factor. The refHandle > > can > >>be >>an entityHandle, in which case there is a destroyEntities operation, or > > it > >>can be a dynamically generated handle, in which case the operation > > should > >>be >>in the markup interface. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Gil Tayar [mailto:Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com] >>Sent: Wed, October 09, 2002 06:34 >>To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org >>Subject: [wsrp-wsia] [I#105] Why no releaseRefHandle()? >> >> >>Topic: Interface >>Class: Technical >>Raised by: Rich Thompson >>Title: Why no releaseRefHandle()? >>Date Added: 9-Oct-2002 >>Document Section: Interfaces/6 >>Description: >>There are times the Consumer 'knows' that a refHandle will no longer be >>used. This operation would allow an explicit signalling of this to the >>Producer. I would suggest adding it to the EntityManagement factor. >> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> >> >> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> >> >> >> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC