Re: [wsn] Issue: RP attribute exentsibility

[Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>]

I think we need to be careful with the
attribute extensibility.  I think we add attribute extensibility where
it makes sense (ie with complexTypes).  I am not keen on making things
more complicated for certain RPs that are already defined nicely as simpleTypes
(eg XSD:dateTime) or some well standardized complexTypes (eg wsa:EndpointReferenceType).

I recommend that we challenge the authoring
team of each spec to propose changes (if any) to the RPs defined, in light
of this consideration.

sgg

++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, IBM Software Group, Web services and SOA
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++

Samuel Meder <meder@mcs.anl.gov>

02/06/2005 10:54 AM

Please respond to
meder

To	wsn-oasis <wsn@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[wsn] Issue: RP attribute exentsibility

During the WSRF f2f we discussed whether to standardize a set of generic
lifetime related attributes (goodtill, goodfrom, etc) for use with
resource properties. It was decided that we would not try to standardize
these in WSRF, but that we would add attribute extensibility to all RPs
defined by the WSRF specs.
We should do the same for any RPs declared in WS-N specs.

/Sam 

-- 
Sam Meder <meder@mcs.anl.gov>
The Globus Alliance - University of Chicago
630-252-1752