Re: [sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agreewith XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

[David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>]

1) but ASM60022 doesn't prohibit searching outside the composite - I just want the intra-compoiste search to be clear.

2) Right, I think this is what we're both trying to lock down.

3) but ASM60028 doesn't indicate the scope of the search, only to raise an error is nothing is found.

3a) has two interpretations as we've been discussing - we need to be left with one interpretation.

3b) promotion is not wiring, it exposes a ref (or service) for wiring. ASM50014 is not relevant to this discussion.

Dave Booz
STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
"Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com

Mike Edwards ---09/08/2009 10:40:05 AM---Dave, I'm happy to be flexible on this but I'd like to point out the following:

From:	Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
To:	David Booz/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS
Date:	09/08/2009 10:40 AM
Subject:	Re: [sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agree with XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

---

Dave, 

I'm happy to be flexible on this but I'd like to point out the following: 

1) Section 5.4.2 has a normative statement that the SCA runtime must search within the composite for autowire targets (ASM60022) 

2) Nowhere is there an implication that the autowire targets can be outside the composite containing the reference 

3) The errors that occur if no autowire targets are found are well described in 5.4.2 with ASM50027 and ASM50028 giving chapter and verse 

That autowire DOES NOT work with promotion by a composite reference is stated in 2 places: 

a) 5.4.2, 1st paragraph (" a component reference which is not promoted...") 

b) 4.3.1 has a normative statement     "If @autowire="true", the autowire procedure MUST only be used if no target is identified by any of 
 the other ways listed above. It is not an error if @autowire="true" and a target is also defined through some other means, however in this 
case the autowire procedure MUST NOT be used. [ASM50014]" 

"other ways listed above" include promotion by a composite reference 

Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  
Email:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

From:	David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>
To:	sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:	08/09/2009 15:25
Subject:	Re: [sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agree with XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

---

Ok, I'm fine with that as well. But in this interpretation, I think we should add something normative to section 5.4.2 along the lines of autowire resolution being within a composite and MUST be satisfied or else error. I'm not sure the spec is clear on this point. I think the normative statements at the end of the section might presume this to be the case, but it is never explicitly stated.

Dave Booz
STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
"Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com

Mike Edwards ---09/08/2009 08:48:46 AM---Dave, I went back through the history of autowire and reached the conclusion

From:	Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
To:	sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:	09/08/2009 08:48 AM
Subject:	Re: [sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agree with XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

---

Dave, 

I went back through the history of autowire and reached the conclusion that it had never been intended that autowire should work 
through a promotion, and that the appearance of @autowire on the XSD for composite reference was a mistake. 

I think that your interpretation is correct - autowire is resolved within the composite containing the component with the autowire reference. 
If not resolved, then its an error if multiplicity 1..x was specified for the reference. 

I also note that my proposal is a simplification of references ;-) 

Yours, Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

From:	David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>
To:	sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:	08/09/2009 13:39
Subject:	Re: [sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agree with XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

---

Interesting. I went back and looked at the spec text again. In my proposal for ASSEMBLY-180 (in JIRA), I'm interpreting lines 1883 (cd03-rev2) in the spec to mean that autowire+promotion is possible, but unfortunately not defined. Mike, you seem to read those words as autowire was never intended to work in conjunction with promotion. I hadn't considered that interpretation. If we were to take that position, then effectively it says that autowire MUST be resolved within the bounds of a given composite (where the domain is a composite for domain level components) and that the failure to find targets within the composite results in an error?

Dave Booz
STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
"Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com

Mike Edwards ---09/08/2009 08:15:26 AM---Folks, I didn't spot that Dave Booz had already raised an issue on this topic.

From:	Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
To:	"OASIS Assembly" <sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:	09/08/2009 08:15 AM
Subject:	[sca-assembly] [ASSEMBLY 180] Composite ref pseudo schema doesn't agree with XML schema definitions - @autowire - PROPOSAL

---

Folks, 

I didn't spot that Dave Booz had already raised an issue on this topic. Please accept the following email as an alternative 
proposal for Issue 180. 

Yours, Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com 
----- Forwarded by Mike Edwards/UK/IBM on 08/09/2009 13:13 -----

From:	Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB
To:	"OASIS Assembly" <sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:	07/09/2009 15:27
Subject:	[sca-assembly] [NEW ISSUE] sca-core.xsd incorrectly has @autowire attribute for composite <reference/> element

---

Raiser: Mike Edwards 

Target: sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03-Rev2.pdf 

Description: 

The sca-core XSD declares the <composite/> <reference/> element to have an @autowire attribute: 

4190      <attribute name="autowire" type="boolean" use="optional"/> 

However, the specification section for the <composite/> <reference/> element does not contain a description of @autowire and the 
pseudo-schema does not contain the @autowire attribute. 

It was never intended that composite references should have an @autowire attribute. If they did, this could lead to dangerous 
default autowire values occurring on components that used a composite containing a composite reference of this kind. 

Proposal: 

Remove the @autowire attibute from the <composite/> <reference/> element in the sca-core XSD. 

This means deleting line 4190 from CD03-Rev2. 


Yours, Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431 
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU