Re: [sca-policy] Suggested wording for POLICY-83

[Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>]

Dave,
See inline below.

   Simon

David Booz wrote:
> Hi Ashok,
> 
> Something about this issue was bugging me last night, so I did some 
> investigation in the spec this AM. Looking at CD02/PRD, line 1451 (in 
> the section which normalizes attached intents into a required intent 
> set), I found this statement:
> "and where any unqualified qualifiable intents are replaced with the 
> default qualified form of that intent, according to the default 
> qualifier in the definition of the intent."
> 
> While it doesn't read quite right, the intention is clearly to replace 
> unqualified intents with their default qualified form and also assumes 
> that there is a default qualifier if there are any qualifiers. This 
> usage of default qualifiers was a surprise to me (i.e., I forgot about 
> it) as I thought that the default qualifier was only used in processing 
> intentMaps in policySets.
> 
> I think the words you propose to resolve POLICY-83 are good.
> 
> I also want to react to the last statement below:
> 
>  >> In other discussions re the SOAP intents we have taken the position 
> that a default qualifier may not be specified. This is contrary to 
> POL30004 and would require a significant change to the spec.
> 
> The current SOAP intent definition has "1_1" set as the default 
> qualifier. Can you help me understand what discussion you're referring 
> to because I might have missed something? The web service binding 
> discussions I'm aware of have not suggested changing this default. We 
> have been discussing the need to declare the qualifiers to be mutually 
> exclusive.
>
The WS Binding spec contains normative text that is incompatible with
SOAP.1_1 being the default qualifier if the unqualified SOAP intent
is used.  The following is from section 4.1:

  So as to narrow the range of choices for how messages are carried,
  the following policy intents affect the transport binding:
   • SOAP
     When the SOAP intent is required, the SCA runtime MUST transmit
     and receive messages using SOAP. One or more SOAP versions can
     be used [BWS40001].
   • SOAP.1_1
     When the SOAP.1_1 intent is required, the SCA runtime MUST transmit
     and receive messages using only SOAP 1.1 [BWS40002].
   • SOAP.1_2
     When the SOAP.1_2 intent is required, the SCA runtime MUST transmit
     and receive messages using only SOAP 1.2 [BWS40003].

Using 1_1 as the default qualifier for the SOAP intent would contradict
the above.  This needs to be resolved between the Policy TC and the
Bindings TC.

   Simon

> 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 ashok malhotra ---05/12/2009 08:24:55 
> AM---Eric pointed out that the existing wording for conformanceashok 
> malhotra ---05/12/2009 08:24:55 AM---Eric pointed out that the existing 
> wording for conformance statement [POL30004] states:
> 
> 
> From:	
> ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
> 
> To:	
> OASIS Policy <sca-policy@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Date:	
> 05/12/2009 08:24 AM
> 
> Subject:	
> [sca-policy] Suggested wording for POLICY-83
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Eric pointed out that the existing wording for conformance statement
> [POL30004] states:
> "If an intent has more than one qualifier, one and only one MUST be
> declared as the default qualifier."
> and does not cover the case where a single qualifier is declared for the
> intent.  See http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-83
> 
> Suggested rewording:
> If an intent has one or more qualifiers, one and only one MUST be
> declared as the default qualifier.
> 
> Note that this is an extra-Schema constraint.  The Schema provides an
> optional 'default' attribute for the
> qualifier definition in the intent so, according to the Schema, this
> attribute can be omitted for all qualifiers or
> set to 'false'.  POL30004 says that this attribute MUST be set to true
> for one and only one of the qualifiers.
> 
> In other discussions re the SOAP intents we have taken the position that
> a default qualifier may not be specified.
> This is contrary to POL30004 and would require a significant change to
> the spec.
> 
> -- 
> All the best, Ashok
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 
> 
> 
>