Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a normativestatement

[Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>]

The problem with this interpretation is that @OneWay would need
to appear on the reference side, and a reference must use a
Java interface and not a Java class.

   Simon

David Booz wrote:
> +1
> 
> 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 ---04/28/2009 08:59:22 
> AM---Simon, I don't think it was the intention of the original woMike 
> Edwards ---04/28/2009 08:59:22 AM---Simon, I don't think it was the 
> intention of the original wording of the spec to
> 
> 
> From:	
> Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
> 
> To:	
> OASIS Java <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Date:	
> 04/28/2009 08:59 AM
> 
> Subject:	
> Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a normative 
> statement
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simon,
> 
> I don't think it was the intention of the original wording of the spec 
> to permit the implementation
> pattern that you describe below.
> 
> I think that the case of class methods being annotated was there to 
> cover the case where the
> whole class defines the interface - as occurs for unannotated classes 
> with purely local interfaces.
> 
> Maybe I have this wrong, but that is how I understand it.
> 
> 
> 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: 	Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>
> To: 	OASIS Java <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 	28/04/2009 12:43
> Subject: 	Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a 
> normative statement
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Mike,
> I agree that this needs to be made normative.
> 
> I had always thought that @OneWay applied only to interface methods.
> The reference to class methods (in the original text and your proposal)
> surprises and intrigues me, because this suggests that @OneWay could
> be applied to a service implementation method without being applied to
> the corresponding interface method.  If this is legal, it would mean
> that the client invokes the service synchronously, and the service
> returns back to the client immediately and dispatches the method for
> subsequent execution.
> 
> Do we want to allow this interaction pattern?  If we do want to allow
> it, then I think we need to make this more explicit in the text.
> 
>  Simon
> 
> Mike Edwards wrote:
>  >
>  > *** NB I am happy for this new issue to be treated as a comment on the
>  > Public Review draft - I just don't want this item lost ***
>  >
>  > Raiser:                Mike Edwards
>  >
>  > Target:                sca-javacaa-1.1-spec-cd02-rev6.doc
>  >
>  > Description:
>  >
>  > There is a sentence in section 10.13 about @OneWay which in effect
>  > describes a normative requirement but is not in the
>  > form of a normative statement:
>  >
>  > Lines 1923 - 1925:
>  >
>  > "The @OneWay annotation is used on a Java interface or class method to
>  > indicate that invocations will be dispatched
>  > in a non-blocking fashion as described in the section on Asynchronous
>  > Programming."
>  >
>  > This must be recast into the form of a normative statement
>  >
>  > Proposal:
>  >
>  > Replace lines 1923 - 1925 with the following normative statement:
>  >
>  > When a Java interface method or a Java class method is annotated with
>  > @OneWay, the SCA runtime MUST ensure that all
>  > invocations of that method are executed in a non-blocking fashion, as
>  > described in the section on Asynchonous Programming.
>  > [JCA90052]
>  >
>  >
>  > 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/
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>