Re: [sca-bindings] [Issue 2] Inlined proposal v5

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Thanks for all the feedback. I'll send out an update based on the 
feedback received on the mailing list.

WRT lack of normative statements in section 5.2, this was intentional.
On a previous call there was a discussion about 2119 keywords in this 
section and the general 'nodding of the heads around the virtual table' 
(as I perceived it) was that we should remove these 2119 keywords. I 
certainly agree with that. The reason being: We are defining a protocol 
that is meant to work with other protocols defined in the WS-* world. 
These protocols are designed to be composable. If an implementation 
conforms to protocol A and B, it should make such a claim. The 
definition of protocol A does not/should not have to specify with 2119 
keywords how A composes with B (unless there is a good reason to). If we 
start doing that, we'll have a combinatorial nightmare: how does 
Callback compose with WS-Trust, WS-SecureConversation, 
WS-ReliableMessaging, WS-Reliability, WS-Coordination, 
WS-AtomicTransactions and so on.

Section 5.2 is meant to be helpful discussion of how the protocol we 
define composes with WS-MC, as enough folks thought that this would be 
very helpful for the reader, addressing perhaps a common scenario. I 
suppose we could move this section to an appendix (with the examples).

Do note that section 6.2 bullet 3 does require conformance to WS-MC 
(scoped to a MAY).

-Anish
--

David Booz wrote:
> +1
> 
> In addition to Mike's point 2, the 3rd paragraph also seems normative.
> 
> 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 Mike Edwards ---06/18/2009 06:25:33 
> AM---Folks, First, thanks for Anish for preparing a thorough reviMike 
> Edwards ---06/18/2009 06:25:33 AM---Folks, First, thanks for Anish for 
> preparing a thorough revision of the proposal.
> 
> 
> From:	
> Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
> 
> To:	
> OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Date:	
> 06/18/2009 06:25 AM
> 
> Subject:	
> Re: [sca-bindings] [Issue 2] Inlined proposal v5
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> First, thanks for Anish for preparing a thorough revision of the proposal.
> 
> Comments:
> 
> 1) [BWS50005] mentions [BWS50003] but BWS50003 no longer exists. I 
> believe that [BWS50002] should be referenced instead.
> 
> 2) It is surprising that the "SCA Web Services Callback with 
> WS-MakeConnection Protocol" section has no normative statements
> I feel that the 2nd paragraph could well have "MUST adhere to" instead 
> of "has to adhere to".
> The 5th paragraph also sounds normative, and "the callback request 
> message is sent as the response" could well be rendered
> as "the callback request message MUST be sent as the response".
> 
> 3) The normative statements in Assertion Attachment section read 
> somewhat clumsily and in some ways miss the real point, which is
> contained in the last paragraph. I wonder if some rewording might make 
> things clearer and more straightforward, such as:
> 
> "Policy Subjects allowed for a WSCallback policy assertion and which can 
> have WSCallback policy assertions attached
> MUST be contained within the scope of the following set of WSDL 1.1 
> elements:
> • wsdl:port
> • wsdl:binding" [BWS500xx]
> 
> 
> 
> Editorial comments:
> 
> a) The references to examples in Appendix E should have hyperlinks in 
> the text.
> 
> b) I'd be happier with references to other specs combining the name of 
> the document and the short form reference tag, such
> as [WS-Addr].
> 
> 
> 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: 	Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
> To: 	OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 	18/06/2009 09:41
> Subject: 	[sca-bindings] [Issue 2] Inlined proposal v5
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Attached.
> 
> This proposal consists of taking the inlined proposal v4 produced by
> MikeE [1] and applying it to CD02 rev4. On top of that I have made the
> following changes (based on the last call where we discussed v4):
> 1) Included a pointer to the appendix examples from section 5.2
> 2) Missing 2119 statement tags are added.
> 3) Fixed cross-references and 2119 stmt highlighing.
> 4) Deleted all the MAY statements that were unnecessary.
> 5) Replaced lowercase 2119 keywords with appropriate non-keyword substitutes
> 6) Made the protocol composable with WS-MC without introducing
> additional conformance points.
> 
> -Anish
> --
> 
> [1] _http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200905/msg00098.html_
> [attachment "sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-rev4-issue2_v5.doc" deleted by 
> Mike Edwards/UK/IBM] [attachment 
> "sca-binding-ws-1.1-spec-cd02-rev4-issue2_v5.pdf" deleted by Mike 
> Edwards/UK/IBM] 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>