Re: [ws-caf] RE: resolution to issue 140

["Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>]

Title: Message

Peter, I'll have to check the schema that was associated with the 0.3 document. Certainly the latest version I have doesn't have the <choice></choice> element in it, and I assumed it was the version that I'd packaged with the 0.3 release. However, the end result is that there shouldn't be a choice at all: only the EPR should be present.

 

I can't say precisely when this change happened, but I would suspect it was New Orleans. Hopefully someone else who was there might have a better recollection.

 

Mark.

----- Original Message -----

From: Furniss, Peter

To: Mark Little ; ws-caf

Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 3:18 PM

Subject: [ws-caf] RE: resolution to issue 140

Mark,

 

I'm sorry, you've confused me somewhat.  In 0.3, the text of section 2, fourth bullet, the context structure in figure 3 and the schema that was in the same zip file all show an optional choice of context-manager (a ServiceRefType) or context-url (a xs:anyURI). There doesn't seem to be any inconsistency among them.

 

The issue pointed out several under-specifications on the interpretation of the context-url choice.  The simplest fix, in terms of editorial work, would be to delete it.

 

If it is true that, by existing decisions, "the only way of accessing the context by reference is via the Context Manager " (i.e. http get dereferencing is not supported and the "context-url" element and all its works should be deleted), then this is an editorial issue to align with this decision, though I'm not quite sure when this was change was agreed.

 

Peter

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@arjuna.com]
Sent: 07 July 2004 14:47
To: ws-caf; Furniss, Peter
Subject: resolution to issue 140

Peter, this is an editorial issue (http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=140). If you check the schema itself, you'll see that the only way of accessing the context by reference is via the Context Manager EPR. The schema in the documentation is wrong and the editors will update it.

 

Mark.