[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-j] JAVA-153: Proposed resolution rev3
Hi Simon,
Two points:
(1)
So then based on your proposal, is the following example correct?
Implementation class:
package services.hello;
@Remotable
@Service(HelloServiceImpl.class)
public class HelloServiceImpl {
public String hello(String message) {
In this case the introspected component type for the implementation uses the @remotable attribute of the <interface.java/> element, as shown in the following snippet:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<componentType xmlns="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200903">
<service name="HelloServiceImpl">
The @remotable attribute is intended as an alternative to using the @Remotable annotation.
That's quite a strong statement and it implies semantics which allow the ability for a component definition to assert remotability onto a service interface. Remember that <interface.java/> is used on both componentTypes and component definitions. I quite like the ability to assert remotability in this way, but I suspect there are also dissenting opinions. I want to make sure we have a consistent story across the specs.
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 ---06/15/2009 07:40:03 AM---I am attaching a revised proposed resolution for JAVA-153, as discussed on last Monday's call.
![]() From: | ![]() Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> |
![]() To: | ![]() OASIS Java <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org> |
![]() Date: | ![]() 06/15/2009 07:40 AM |
![]() Subject: | ![]() [sca-j] JAVA-153: Proposed resolution rev3 |
sca-javaci-1.1-spec-cd01+issue153-rev3.doc
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]