Re: [regrep] [RS Issue] Need clarification on comment on line 1410

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

Farrukh Najmi wrote:

>
>
>>
>> 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.

I guess in practice, if a registry object is *really* important to a 
user, they should subscrtibe to its' auditable events.  That way, if 
they assert a reference or association, they do have a mechanism to be 
notified and do something.

Duane


>
>>
>> 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. 
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

-- 
***********
Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
Chair - OASIS eb SOA TC - http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebsoa
***********