sca-bindings message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 25: AI to figure out where we are on this
- From: Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>
- To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:48:14 +0000
The resolution to the conformance statement
numbering issues included adding a statement to all binding specs:
Conformance to this specification requires
conformance to the SCA Assembly and SCA Policy specifications
Regards, Simon
Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet - Simon_Holdsworth@uk.ibm.com
Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>
19/03/2009 15:43
|
To
| sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 25: AI to figure
out where we are on this |
|
Anish Karmarkar wrote:
> David Booz wrote:
>> I tend to agree with Eric about 2)-7)...and you're missing a statement
>> about conforming to the Policy FW spec.
>
> That was done intentionally. Binding depends on Assembly and Assembly
> depends on Policy (it's all one big happy family ;-) ).
> But an explicit dependency in binding.ws is fine too.
>
If the WS Binding spec has any direct dependencies on Policy, then
those should be stated in the WS Binding spec IMO. If the only
dependency is the transitive one via Assembly, then I think it's
best to let Assembly pull in the Policy dependency.
Simon
> -Anish
> --
>
>>
>> Eric, on your point about ed. mishaps. In the other specs we've
>> avoided that by actually putting the text into the table, and
then
>> bookmark linking it into the body of the document, so there's
not two
>> copies of the normative statements. I am assuming we'll do the
same in
>> the binding specs.
>>
>> 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
>>
>> Inactive hide details for Eric Johnson ---03/12/2009 02:04:57
>> AM---Seems like you're restating a number of the MUSTs from the
rEric
>> Johnson ---03/12/2009 02:04:57 AM---Seems like you're restating
a
>> number of the MUSTs from the rest of the text, but you've got
some cri
>>
>>
>> From:
>> Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
>>
>> To:
>> Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
>>
>> Cc:
>> OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
>>
>> Date:
>> 03/12/2009 02:04 AM
>>
>> Subject:
>> Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 25: AI to figure out where we are on
this
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems like you're restating a number of the MUSTs from the rest
of the
>> text, but you've got some criteria for choosing a subset that
escapes
>> me. Also feels like it doesn't help to clarify the requirements
when
>> those "MUST" statements are taken out of context.
>>
>> Further, as you reference, the editors have an action item to
produce a
>> table of all the conformance statements at the end of the spec.
So with
>> your proposal, we've got "MUSTs" in section five that
repeat both that
>> appendix, and the text itself. I'm also assuming that the
appendix
>> would be non-normative(!), so if by some editorial mishap, one
of the
>> MUST statements from the text is missing, it doesn't matter if
it is not
>> in the table.
>>
>> I'd prefer to see the "new" conformance statement in
line with the rest
>> of the text that relates to the MUST.
>>
>> -Eric.
>>
>> Anish Karmarkar wrote:
>> > Here is a proposal to resolve issue 25 based on the
direction
>> > discussed during the last virtual f2f.
>> >
>> > Change section 5 from:
>> >
>> > -----
>> > Any SCA runtime that claims to support this binding
MUST abide by the
>> > requirements of this specification.
>> >
>> > The normative web services binding XML Schema can be
obtained by
>> > dereferencing the XML Schema namespace, and is also
included for
>> > convenience in Appendix A. The <binding.ws> element
MUST be valid
>> > according to its XML Schema.
>> > -----
>> >
>> > to:
>> >
>> > -----
>> > An implementation that claims to conform to the requirements
of an SCA
>> > Runtime defined in this specification MUST meet the
following
>> conditions:
>> > 1) The implementation MUST comply with all statements
in Appendix XXX:
>> > Conformance Items related to an SCA Runtime, notably
all MUST
>> > statements have to be implemented.
>> > 2) The implementation MUST conform to the SCA Assembly
Model
>> > Specification Version 1.1 [Assembly].
>> > 2) The implementation MUST support the SOAP.1_1 intent.
>> > 3) The implementation MUST support the @wsdlElement
and @wsdlLocation
>> > attributes of the <binding.ws> element.
>> > 4) The implementation MUST support a WSDL binding identified
by the
>> > WSDL element {http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/}binding
that has
>> > the @transport attribute with a value of
>> > "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http".
>> > 5) The implementation SHOULD support the SOAP.1_2 intent.
>> > 6) The implementation SHOULD support the <EndpointReference>
element.
>> > 7) The implementation SHOULD support a WSDL binding
identified by the
>> > WSDL element {http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap12/}binding
that has
>> > the @transport attribute with a value of
>> > "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http".
>> >
>> > The normative web services binding XML Schema can be
obtained by
>> > dereferencing the XML Schema namespace, and is also
included for
>> > convenience in Appendix A. The <binding.ws> element
MUST be valid
>> > according to its XML Schema.
>> > -----
>> >
>> > Note that Appendix XXX refers to the appendix that
will contain all
>> > the tagged normative statement. This proposal is based
on the approved
>> > conformance text from Assembly spec.
>> >
>> > -Anish
>> > --
>> >
>> > Anish Karmarkar wrote:
>> >> On the last call I mentioned that a proposal for
25 was made and
>> >> there was a discussion on an earlier call. I took
an AI to figure out
>> >> where we are on this.
>> >>
>> >> The proposal and relevant discussion starts at
[1]. At the virtual
>> >> f2f [2] we did discuss this at length. We ended
with the following
>> >> revised proposal:
>> >>
>> >> 1) MUST for: SOAP.1_1 intent, @wsdlElement, @wsdlLocation,
>> >> {http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/}binding
with
>> >> transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"
>> >> 2) SHOULD for: SOAP.1_2,
>> >> {http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap12/}binding
with
>> >> transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http",
>> sca:EndpointReference
>> >>
>> >> We did not vote on this because SimonN requested
that we resolve
>> >> issue 54 first, since his vote on this proposal
would depend on the
>> >> resolution on issue 54. So there is a dependency
on 54.
>> >>
>> >> -Anish
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> [1]
>> >>
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200902/msg00049.html
>> >> [2]
>> >>
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bindings/download.php/31216/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202009-02-10.doc
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave
the OASIS TC that
>> >> generates this mail. Follow this link to
all your TCs in OASIS at:
>> >>
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave
the OASIS TC that
>> > generates this mail. Follow this link to all
your TCs in OASIS at:
>> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
that
>> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in
OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS
at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
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
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]