OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-bindings message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] Updated proposal for BINDINGS-54 - proposal rev #9


1. I much prefer Simon's text from [1] for the 1st paragraph in section 2.2.

2. There's a formatting problem at the end of section 2.2.

3. I prefer the term "SCA runtime" (which is used everywhere) to just plain "runtime" on line 294. "For a reference binding, the SCA Runtime..."


[1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200905/msg00047.html

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 ---05/19/2009 09:57:01 AM---Attempt #9, addressing the concerns the Simon raised. Simon Eric Johnson ---05/19/2009 09:57:01 AM---Attempt #9, addressing the concerns the Simon raised. Simon Nash wrote:


From:

Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>

To:

Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>

Cc:

OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>

Date:

05/19/2009 09:57 AM

Subject:

Re: [sca-bindings] Updated proposal for BINDINGS-54 - proposal rev #9





Attempt #9, addressing the concerns the Simon raised.

Simon Nash wrote:
> Eric Johnson wrote:
>> OK, one more try.
>>
>> Simon Nash wrote:
>>
>>> 3. Under point 1 in the algorithm for reference URIs, the second
>>>    sentence is redundant (assuming the change in item 1 above)
>>>    and should be removed.
>> Agreed.  The change I made here was to remove the RFC 2119 language.  I
>> thought it useful to remind the reader.  I've left this as is in my
>> latest revision.
> >
> I think the third bullet makes this extrememly clear.  Having the
> same information twice in the same list seems more confusing to me.
I've made the edits as you suggested.
>
>>> 4. With the new prohibition on using any combinations of @uri,
>>>    endpointReference, @wsdlElement/wsdl.port and
>>> @wsdlElement/wsdl.service,
>>>    points 1, 2 and 3 of the algorithm for reference URIs are now
>>>    mutually exclusive.  This means we no longer need to use an
>>>    algorithm with ordered steps.
>> I thought about this, and almost changed it with the 07 draft.  Since
>> you noticed this as well, I've now changed it.
> >
> I don't think we still need the reference to "first step"
> before the bullets.  It's also no longer appropriate to refer to
> "above steps" after the bullet.  We should be able to collapse the
> text before and after the bullet into a single normative rule, as
> follows:
>
>  For a reference binding, the SCA runtime MUST apply the appropriate
>  rule from the following, or raise an error:
>
>  <the bullets follow>
I've changed this around, although I did not employ your exact wording.

-Eric.

(See attached file: sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-issue54-proposal-09.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 

sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-issue54-proposal-09.doc



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]