wsdm message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm] RE: [wsn] Re: [wsdm] Proposed requirement from WSDM
- From: "Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>
- To: "Steve Graham" <sggraham@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:06:59 -0700
On the WSDM conf call I confirmed with the group that
WSDM is ok to defer to WSN on whether the resulting notification message should
comply with the schema or not.
William
I think the heart of the requirement is "let the subscriber
tell the producer what parts of the message the consumer wants". The part about
"must comply to the schema" is secondary. My guess is WSDM would be happy to
defer to WSN to decide on this.
William
"Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com> wrote
on 09/09/2004 07:35:01 PM:
> Yes, this is a hard part. On solution is
to drop the "must comply to the schema"
> requirement, for example by
saying that this subscribe option can only be used on
> topics that
contain "xsd:Any" in their associated "messageType" attribute.
How important is the "must comply to schema" constraint in
your scenario. Given that
the subscriber is
imposing this message subset constraint, it strikes me that
the subscriber/consumer should then be capable of dealing
with an arbitrary
message type that results
from the subset. Quite frankly I don't see why the
NotificationProducer would care whether the message (post subsetting)
would validate
or not. To me, the
validation constraint is one of producer-consumer coordination.
If the subscriber/consumer specifically chooses to have a
subsetting constraint, then
the shape of the
resulting message should be the subscriber/consumer's concern alone.
>
>
Another option is to say that this allows you to drop elements that have a
> minOccurs of zero. Maybe to keep it simple we also say that these
elements must be
> direct children of the root. Or maybe we let them be
anywhere.
The more "special casing" we do, the
harder the implementation and the more cases where
the feature is not usable. I would prefer dropping the
validation constraint.
>
> We can try to come up with
solutions to this. But the first order of business is
> for this group to
decide whether to open an issue on this requirement from WSDM.
Agreed.
>
> Regards,
>
> William
>
> From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 11:29 AM
> To: Steve Graham;
Vambenepe, William N
> Cc: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org;
wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsn] Re: [wsdm] Proposed
requirement from WSDM
> > It will, of
course be very tricky to make sure that the "pattern" expressed will
>
end up with a notification message that is
>
> still validatable with respect to the message schema.
>
> I
had the same type of reaction when reading the requirement. How do you guys in
> WSDM make a server accept messages that do not comply with the WSDL
schema
> specified for the complete message? Do you also define
submessage schemas in the WSDL?
>
> Thank you,
> Ugo
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
>
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 11:08 AM
> To: Vambenepe, William
N
> Cc: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org; wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
>
Subject: [wsn] Re: [wsdm] Proposed requirement from
WSDM
>
> Interesting.
> So
this is kinda like a very strongly applied filter expression?
> Right
now, the selector specifies a pattern that MUST be met in order for the
>
entire message to be sent.
>
> If I understand this requirement,
it is an additional "expression" on the
> subscribe, but stating the
pattern of the notification itself, ie the elements that must
> appear on
the notification and no more than those elements specified.
>
> It
will, of course be very tricky to make sure that the "pattern" expressed will
> end up with a notification message that is still validatable with
respect
> to the message schema.
>
> sgg
>
>
++++++++
> Steve Graham
> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> STSM, On
Demand Architecture
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> <Soli
Deo Gloria/>
> ++++++++
>
>
>
> "Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>
> 09/09/2004 01:34 PM
>
> To
>
>
<wsn@lists.oasis-open.org>
>
>
cc
>
>
<wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org>
>
>
Subject
>
> [wsdm] Proposed
requirement from WSDM
>
>
>
>
> Dear WSNers,
>
> The WSDM TC would like to submit
the following requirement to WSN:
>
> "Add the option, when
subscribing for notification, to specify that only
> parts of the message
should be sent. Note that the message that is sent
> still needs to be
schema-valid for the schema of the message."
>
> The reasoning
behind this requirement is that the content of the
> notification message
can get very large and in some cases only a subset
> of this is of
interest to the consumer. And in some cases, the
> notification producer
doesn't know what parts of the notification the
> consumer is interested
in, but the subscriber knows. So it should be
> possible for the
subscriber to express this in the subscription.
>
> The WSDM TC
would like WSN to add this to the WSN issues list.
>
>
Regards,
>
> William
>
> PS: doesn't it make us all
feel good that Outlook wants to correct
> "WSNers" to "Winners" on the
first line of this email? ;-)
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing
list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS
> TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsdm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]