From: Simon Nash
[mailto:NASH@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 6:46 PM
To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Cc: Mary McRae; 'Michael Rowley'; sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [sca-j] package names
Mary,
Many thanks for
this input. The sca-j TC will now proceed to a formal decision on the
package names.
Simon
Simon C. Nash, IBM Distinguished Engineer
Member of the IBM Academy of Technology
Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
"Mary
McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
Sent by: Mary
McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>
07/03/2008
16:30
Please respond to
<mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
|
|
To
|
Simon
Nash/UK/IBM@IBMGB
|
cc
|
"'Michael
Rowley'" <mrowley@bea.com>, <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
|
RE:
[sca-j] package names
|
|
Hi
Simon et al,
Thank you for this input. I have circulated this message among staff and we
agree that the Java package names should not be changed.
Should the TC at some point in the future create new Java APIs, we (OASIS
staff) anticipate working with the committee members to arrive at an acceptable
package name that is linked to OASIS.
Regards,
Mary
-----------------------------------
Mary P McRae
Manager of TC
Administration, OASIS
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
web: www.oasis-open.org
phone:
603.232.9090
From: Simon Nash
[mailto:NASH@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 6:47 PM
To: Mary McRae
Cc: Michael Rowley; sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Fw: [sca-j] package names
Mary,
I am following up on this discussion on behalf of the OpenCSA sca-j co-chairs.
There is now a formal issue open for this (JAVA-28), with a proposed
resolution to leave the Java package names as they are specified in the SCA 1.0
input documents submitted to OASIS (i.e., as "org.osoa.sca" and
"org.osoa.sca.annotations").
The sca-j TC has asked the sca-j co-chairs to clarify whether a decision by the
sca-j TC to retain exisiting package names starting "org.osoa," for
compatibility reasons would be acceptable to OASIS. When we have received
this clarfication, we will proceed to a resolution of this issue.
The rationale for leaving the names unchanged is that products are already
available that implement the current package names, and a growing body of
applications is being created that uses the current package names.
Changing the package names would require all implementing products and
all using applications to make an incompatible change, which would be very disruptive.
The JCP has many precedents for how to deal with this situation. It is
appropriate to look to the JCP for guidance, as this body has a lot of
experience in dealing with Java package name issues. Over the years, the
JCP has brought many APIs into the JDK that were previously in extension
packages. The normal naming convention for APIs in the JDK is to start
package names with "java." and for APIs in extension packages the
convention is to start them with "javax." However, when APIs
are brought into the JDK from extensions, the existing "javax." names
are not changed to "java." names but are retained unchanged.
This is because the disruptive impact of package renaming on developers
would outweigh the value of strict naming consistency within the JDK.
In addition to package names starting with "java." and
"javax.", the JDK contains many APIs with other package names such as
"org.ietf.", "org.omg.", "org.xml.", and
"org.w3c.". These names were previously created by other
"de jure" or "de facto" standards organizations, and were
left unchanged when the APIs were brought into the JDK.
For new Java APIs created by OASIS, a consistent package naming convention that
identifies the APIs as belonging to OASIS is clearly desirable. An
obvious choice would be "org.oasis." but there is a difficulty with
this name because normal Java package naming rules would give the right to use
the "org.oasis." package name to the owner of the
"oasis.org" domain and not to the owner of the "oasis-open.org"
domain. The name "org.oasis-open." cannot be used for Java
packages, because the minus sign "-" is not valid within a Java name.
OASIS needs to resolve this problem so that it can give naming guidance
for new Java package names created by OASIS TCs, but this is a separate
discussion from the issue that is facing the sca-j TC today.
It should be pointed out that the OASIS policy of requiring XML schema
namespaces to be within the oasis-open.org domain has a technical justification
that does not apply to Java package names. XML schema URIs may need to be
dereferenceable directly from a URL that is fully under OASIS control, and this
can only be achieved by putting schema names in the oasis-open.org domain.
This consideration does not apply to Java API names, which are never
deferenced directly.
Many thanks for your help with this.
Simon
Simon C. Nash, IBM Distinguished Engineer
Member of the IBM Academy of Technology
Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
----- Forwarded by Simon Nash/UK/IBM on 02/03/2008 22:39 -----
Bryan
Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>
14/01/2008
13:29
|
To
|
sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
Fw:
[sca-j] package names
|
|
Mary's feedback.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Master Inventor
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com
----- Forwarded by Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM on 01/14/2008 08:29 AM -----
"Mary
McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
Sent by: Mary McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>
12/13/2007
05:06 PM
Please respond to
<mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
|
|
To
|
Bryan
Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE:
[sca-j] package names
|
|
Thanks Bryan, for the info. I hadn’t considered actual executable code. I think
replacing osoa with oasis is all that would be required; beyond that I would
accept best practice. Most TCs aren’t involved in writing code, or it’s done as
an external project and not part of the actual TC work product.
I’m glad I asked the question!
Mary
From:
Bryan Aupperle [mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 4:34 PM
To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [sca-j] package names
Packages are a Java concept and are used partition the Java name space to
eliminate collisions much the same way namespaces are used in XML. They
are hierarchical in nature and there is a direct correspondence between the
package name hierarchy and the directory structure in which the classes that
belong to packages are stored in a file system. Some examples:
java.lang.annotation
javax.xml.xpath
org.apache.xerces
org.eclipse.sdk
As I said below, the current one for SCA is org.osoa.sca, but I suspect that
this will need to change. There is a similar concept is C++, which is
prompting my query. C++ has a namespace construct. It is also
hierarchical in nature insofar as one namespace can be nested in another.
C++ namespaces have names that are valid C++ identifiers. Currently
in C++ we use osoa::sca.
I did not find anything in the OASIS material that provided any guidance on
this.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Master Inventor
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com
"Mary
McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
Sent by: Mary McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>
12/13/2007
01:24 PM
Please respond to
<mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
|
|
To
|
Bryan
Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE:
[sca-j] package names
|
|
Hi Bryan,
Not sure what you mean by “package names” – there are TC Admin-approved namespace
and URI designs, if that’s what you’re referring to? If not, I’m happy to
provide assistance.
Regards,
Mary
From:
Bryan Aupperle [mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 12:11 PM
To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [sca-j] package names
I know that this is a minor thing, but has there been any discussion about
needing to change the package names from org.osoa.sca... to something else -
potentially org.oasis.sca... or org.oasis-open.sca...?
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Research Triangle Park, NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.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