sca-j message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a normativestatement
- From: David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>
- To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:11:01 -0400
I'm confused. Mike said (and I agreed) the reference to impl class is for use as a service interface (the interface in this case is logically present, derived from the impl class). For an SCA reference, you have to have an interface with a @OneWay annotation (because using an impl class at that point doesn't make any sense). What's the problem? Are you suggesting that the reference itself should be annotate-able with @OneWay so that you don't have to have an interface?
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
Simon Nash ---04/28/2009 09:35:26 AM---The problem with this interpretation is that @OneWay would need to appear on the reference side, and
From: |
Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> |
To: |
sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org |
Date: |
04/28/2009 09:35 AM |
Subject: |
Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a normative statement |
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/
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]