Re: [wsrf] [WSRF 4] continued discussion

[David Snelling <David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com>]

Folks,

+1 to all this.

  Thanks Tim!

On 12 Oct 2004, at 15:38, Tim Banks wrote:

>
>
>
>
> This issue is unresolved; let's see if we have a conclusion.
>
> Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com> wrote on 20/09/2004 13:44:37:
>
>>
>> I need to propose some text to resolve Issue wsrf 4.
>>
>> Here is the text of the issue:
>> Issue WSRF4: GetResourceProperty on property document with xsd:any
>> When a property document schema contains an xsd:any element and a
>> GetResourceProperty message is received for a property QName for
>> which there is currently no instance, what should be the response?
>
> At the F2F in July, three cases were identified:
>
> a) Where the property is defined, but minoccurs=0.  We agreed a 'nil'
> response is right.
> b) For an instance document with a dynamic ‘stacktrace’ property,  a
> request for ‘stooktrace’ should return an error.
> c) What if there is a request for a property that sometimes is present?
>
> We observed that: the server may behave as if it’s there, or if it's 
> not.
> It may even depend on the timing of the request vs the creation of the
> property by the service, so  we can only describe what the service 
> could
> do.
>
> Steve Proposed (on 20th Sept) a modification of 'section 5.1, defining
> GetResourceProperty message exchange'  of the RP spec to allow for 
> dynamic
> properties:
>>
>> /wsrp:GetResourceProperty/QName
>> This MUST correspond to the QName of a resource property element
>> child of the root of the WS-Resource’s resource properties document.
>>  Removing the word "defined" eliminates the possible interpretation
>> that the QName must be defined in the schema of the RP document.
>
> Which got +1 from Tom Maguire, Brian Murray and (now) myself.
>
>
> So, I think the current proposal is that the server may respond with a
> fault OR a 'nil' for dynamic properties, but should not respond with 
> 'nil'
> to requests which are misspelled. The client may use
> GetAllResourceProperties request (See issue 27) to discover, at any
> particular instant, the full range of property names and has a very 
> good
> chance of detecting misbehaviour.  This advice should go in the 
> AppNotes
> document.
>
> Issue 4 can be moved to 'resolved' on this basis, I think.
>
> This solution could be further refined following the outline agreed at 
> the
> July f2f around the issue now known as WSRF 66:
>
> Proposed a) A new resource property – allowedRPQNames, ie those which 
> will
> not throw ‘unknown resource’ fault.
> This properties will return the relevant RP QNames and the 
> schemalocation.
> (No objections)
> Proposed b) A new resource property – presentRPQNnames, which 
> indicates a
> property of the relevant name in the instance document.
> This property will return the relevant RP QNames and the 
> schemalocation.
> (No Objections)
> Proposed c) A capability - GetRPDecl (QName) -  to return the current 
> RP
> document declaration ( minoccurs/maxoccurs/nillable etc) for each QName
> requested.
> (No Objections)
>
>
>
>
>
>
-- 

Take care:

     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE

     +44-208-606-4649 (Office)
     +44-208-606-4539 (Fax)
     +44-7768-807526  (Mobile)