[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sca-policy] ISSUE POLICY-18 : Should qualifiable intents have a default qualifier
|
We discussed a potential solution to this issue on yesterday's policy
TC. Here is a proposal that I believe fits with the discussion that we
had (and fulfills the action item I took on the call). First, it is worth noting the situations where the current approach of
having a default qualifier in an intent map, doesn't work: 1) Policy sets aren't used because binding.sca is being used, and that
binding uses intents directly, rather than using policy sets. 2) If a binding specifies a qualifiable intent in its list of
@mayProvide intents, then no policy sets or intent maps will be used. 3) When policy sets for qualified intents are specified separately,
rather than being part of a single intent map, then there is no place to put a
default qualifier. This approach is valuable for qualifiable intents that
may gain additional qualifiers over time. To handle these situations, a intent definition will get a new
attribute called @defaultQualifier. The value of the attribute is the
name of a qualifier (so the full quaified intent would be "<qualifiable
intent name>.<qualifier name>"). This default has lower priority than defaults that might be found in
intent maps. So, if some construct which includes intent "a" in
its @requires list matches against a policySet that includes "a" in
its @provides list, then that policy set will be used, irrespective of any
default qualifier listed in the intent definition for "a". If "a"
is qualifiable, then the policy set that provides it will most likely include
an intent map, although that isn’t strictly necessary. The policy set matching algorithm in section 4.10 will need to be
modified. Step E currently reads: E. Choose the smallest collection of additional
policySets that match all remaining required intents. This will need the following addition: If there are multiple matching policy sets whose
@provides lists are identical except that each provides a different qualifier
for the same qualifiable intent, then only the policy set that provides the
qualifier that was defined as the default qualifier will be used. I know that the above text is quite complicated, so I hope someone will
suggest how it can be made simpler. I think we also need to address intents offered by the @mayProvide list
for bindings. I think the rule should be something like the following: If a binding lists a qualifiable intent in its
@mayProvide list, then the binding is assumed to support any of the qualifiers
for that intent (i.e. the binding will do the right thing if the qualified
intent is required). If only the qualifiable form of the intent is
required, then the behavior is the same as if the qualified intent that
corresponds to the default qualifier had been required. Michael -----Original Message----- Hi folks, The link for this issue in the SCA Policy TC JIRA:
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-18 Regards, Kaanu Joshi ________________________________________ From: ashok malhotra [ashok.malhotra@oracle.com] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:29 PM To: OASIS Policy Subject: [sca-policy] NEW ISSUE: Should qualifiable intens have a
default qualifier TARGET: SCA Policy Framework DESCRIPTION : The transaction proposal needs to capture default qualified intent behavior outside of a policySet. PROPOSAL: PROVENANCE: SCA-182 by booz on 2006-10-23 08:49:45 -- All the best, Ashok --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. You may a link to this group and 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]