[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] [RS Issue] Need clarification on comment on line 1410
Duane Nickull wrote: > What about a status of "deprecated"? It stays in for XX days. Thats a good point. Why not just deprecate the object in the use case that Matt decsribed. That allows all existing references to work but prevents new references to be added. I suggest we make no change on this issue. > > Automatic notification to the owners of the references? I think there should be no automatic notifications in the system because notifications are expensive and should be tightly controlled. > > Duane > > Goran Zugic wrote: > >> I think that we should not allow a RegistryObject to be deleted if it >> has >> references to it. Having RegistryObjects that reference other >> RegistryObjects that do not exist change basic referential integrity >> principal. >> >> Matt's idea about routine business evolution cases makes sense to me >> and I >> agree that a Registry Administrator only could remove a referenced >> RegistryObject. The RegistryAdministrator should be allowed to do this >> operation only if an object replacement is provided so that the >> referential >> integrity principal is still in place. I hope that a reference to new >> object >> could be added as the RemoveObjectsRequest attribute. >> >> Regards, >> Goran >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Farrukh Najmi" >> <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> >> To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> >> Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 5:46 PM >> Subject: Re: [regrep] [RS Issue] Need clarification on comment on >> line 1410 >> >> >>> Matthew MacKenzie wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, that is unclear. >>>> >>>> Currently, if a removal is attempted against an object that has live >>>> references, the removal is aborted -- a very safe approach to be sure. >>>> My thought was that we could possibly make this more intelligent >>>> and at >>>> the same time allow the registry to deal with routine business >>>> evolution -- users leaving the company, data models being refactored, >>>> etc. >>>> >>>> So, my thinking was to allow a registry administrator to delete an >>>> object >>>> and at the time of removal specify that all references to the object >>>> being deleted be targetted/based at/on a new object. The new object >>>> could be an equivalent object, or even a link to an auditable event >>>> which >>>> would allow browsers to at least see that a reference was forcibly >>>> removed. >>> >>> >>> >>> I understand what you had in mind now as follows: >>> >>> -Allow an object to be deleted even when it has refrences to it >>> >>> -Somehow update references to deleted object to point to its >>> replacement >>> if any or to the AuditableEvent that marks its deletion if it has no >>> replacement. >>> >>> Updating all references would be too costly IMO. The other issue is >>> how to >>> specify replacement object when deleting an object. >>> >>> I think it would be cleaner to simply by default allow an object to be >>> deleted even if it has refrences to it and if define how dangling >>> references should be handles by registry and clients. For example we >>> could >>> say that registry MUST return objects matching a query even if they >>> have >>> dangling references and that it should return >>> UnresolvedReferenceException >>> if client attempts to fetch the object by its reference using a >>> query. As >>> for clients we could say that they should be prepared to handle >>> UnresolvedReferenceException when fetching an object by its reference. >>> >>> I could support above modification to Matt's original suggestion or >>> something along those lines. What do other folks think? >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Matt >>>> Farrukh Najmi wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Matt, >>>>> >>>>> Please clarify clearly what you intended to convey in this comment. >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Line 1410: "I would prefer if we could allow an overide that says >>>>> "point >>>>> references to this object, such as an auditable event that chronicles >>>>> the deletion"." >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Farrukh >>> >>> >>> 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/regrep/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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. >> >> > -- Regards, Farrukh
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]