Re: [sca-policy] ISSUE-72: Nesting <intentMap> shoud be removed fromQualifer XSD type - proposal

[David Booz <booz@us.ibm.com>]

Hi Ashok,

Yes, what was I thinking? I don't know. I've fixed the schema to remove the choice.

On your questions:
1) I removed it, but since I sent the pdf and not the word doc, it was probably hard to find all my changes. I've attached the Word doc this time.
2) Before we changed the intent schema to the structured form it has now, it was possible for qualifiers to have qualifiers, but we never had a solid use case. It was only theoretical. That's why we had intentMaps within intentMaps. When we made the change to the current structural intent def'n we removed the ability for qualifiers to have qualifiers and should have removed nested intentMaps as well.

(See attached file: sca-policy-1.1-spec-cd02-issue72-v2.doc)



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

ashok malhotra ---03/26/2009 05:01:29 PM---Dave: A couple of comments.

From:	ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
To:	David Booz/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:	sca-policy@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:	03/26/2009 05:01 PM
Subject:	Re: [sca-policy] ISSUE-72: Nesting <intentMap> shoud be removed from Qualifer XSD type - proposal

---

Dave:
A couple of comments.
You removed the ability to add an intent map as a child of an intent 
map.  This is fine.

In the schema you now have:
<complexType name="Qualifier">
2416 <choice minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded">
2417 <any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
2418 </choice>
2419 <attribute name="name" type="string" use="required"/>
2420 <anyAttribute namespace="##any" processContents="lax"/>
2421 </complexType>

Why do we still need the <choice> ?.  I think it can be removed.

Some questions.
1.  There used to be an example of an intent map within an intent map.  
Did that get dropped somewhere along the way.  If not, we shd remove it now.
2. Was there ever the ability in the schema to declare qualifiers for 
qualified intents?  I don't remember this.
If we never had it, what was the purpose of allowing intent maps within 
intent maps?
All the best, Ashok


David Booz wrote:
>
> Attached is a proposal to resolve Issue 72 
> (http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-72)
>
> /(See attached file: sca-policy-1.1-spec-cd02-issue72-v1.pdf)/
>
> 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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

sca-policy-1.1-spec-cd02-issue72-v2.doc