Re: [sca-policy] NEW ISSUE: What is the purpose of definitions/bindingelement?

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Sorry for the delay in responding.
I'll raise this issue with the bindings TC. Please don't log this in 
JIRA as a policy issue.

Thanks.

-Anish
--

On 10/14/2009 4:46 AM, David Booz wrote:
> Anish,
> 
> Before I log this as a new issue, did you really intend this for the 
> Policy TC? I would have thought this needed to be debated in either 
> Bindings or Assembly. Policy has nothing to say about the binding 
> element in the definitions file and has no authority over that part of 
> the definitions file. Of course, if you did intend this to go to Policy 
> then I'll log the issue as per process. I just want to make sure of your 
> intentions.
> 
> 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 Anish Karmarkar ---10/13/2009 06:38:19 
> PM---Title: What is the purpose of definitions/binding elementAnish 
> Karmarkar ---10/13/2009 06:38:19 PM---Title: What is the purpose of 
> definitions/binding element? Target: SCA policy spec (and SCA assembly
> 
> 
> From:	
> Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
> 
> To:	
> OASIS Policy <sca-policy@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> Date:	
> 10/13/2009 06:38 PM
> 
> Subject:	
> [sca-policy] NEW ISSUE: What is the purpose of definitions/binding element?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Title: What is the purpose of definitions/binding element?
> 
> Target: SCA policy spec (and SCA assembly spec/JCA binding)
> 
> Description:
> The definitions infoset allows <bindingType> and <binding> child
> elements. It is quite easy to see how/why <bindingType> is used for. It
> points to the binding type (eg binding.ws) and specified which intents
> are always provided or can be provided.
> 
> But it is not clear what the definitions/binding element would be used
> for. In a composite/CT it is used to declare a binding instance that can
> contain a specific URL for the binding, policySets, etc. Neither the
> policy or the assembly spec explains what this element means when it
> occurs under definitions. AIUI (thanks Dave!), JCA binding uses it to
> specify common configuration information which is then referenced from a
> binding.jca instance. This, seems like a fine thing to do conceptually,
> but an unrestricted definitions/binding element should not be allowed.
> IOW, one should not be allowed to configure a definitions/binding.jca
> that contains a 'uri' attribute. Furthermore, you can't have, say,
> definitions/binding.ws, since it would be meaningless and very confusing.
> 
> I would like to point out that we have a similar requirement for
> properties and we use a 'file' attribute on component/property to
> satisfy that requirement. If this need is specific to JCA then I would
> suggest that the JCA binding should deal with this and not the
> policy/assembly specs.
> 
> Proposal:
> If I got the usage right, then I would suggest getting rid of
> definitions/binding from Policy/Assembly and asking binding.jca to
> define an appropriate element/attribute that would provide an
> indirection for reusable config info.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -Anish
> --
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 
> 
> 
>