RE: [wsrf] new issue request: PutResourcePropertiesDocument

["Springer, Ian P." <ian.springer@hp.com>]

Igor,

Won't all MuWS services have at least one RO prop - muws-xs:ResourceId ?
Then there are all of the optional portTypes from WS-RF, WS-N, and MuWS,
many of which define required RO props.
 
I don't like PutResourcePropertiesDocument for the following reasons:

1) I think the RP doc would typically be initialized on the provider
side, not by the consumer.
2) In the rare case where a consumer wants to update the entire
document, they could do so via
   a single SetResourceProperties request that contains an Update
subelement for each non-RO prop.
3) The definition below is so loose that the consumer can't predict how
a provider will interpret
   PutResourcePropertiesDocument requests.

Ian
________________________________

	From: Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com] 
	Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 2:49 PM
	To: Springer, Ian P.; wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
	Subject: RE: [wsrf] new issue request:
PutResourcePropertiesDocument
	
	
	We've actually discussed this on the call. The validity of put
request MUST conform to schema and the rest is application specifics.
That is if the provider decided to expose this functionality it will
	a) return fault when detecting changes to RO properties
	b) will not make changes to RO properties and return the
document in the response
	Eiher way, if the provider decides it wants to deal with this or
not. That is, normally one would not have any RO properties if indending
to expose this operation.
	 

	-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
	-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749

	 

________________________________

	From: Springer, Ian P. [mailto:ian.springer@hp.com] 
	Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 2:15 PM
	To: Sedukhin, Igor S; wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
	Subject: RE: [wsrf] new issue request:
PutResourcePropertiesDocument
	
	
	Igor,
	 
	How would you deal with read-only properties?
	 
	Ian


________________________________

		From: Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com] 
		Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 1:21 PM
		To: wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
		Subject: [wsrf] new issue request:
PutResourcePropertiesDocument
		
		

		To mirror GetResourcePropertiesDocument operation
addition of which was accepted on today's call, I propose to add an
operation to put the properties document.

		The reasons are

		-          symmetry

		-          message processing infrastructure schema
validation vs. in-application schema validation

		-          small property document updates

		-          Another alternative for simple applications
to implement instead of full-blown set/update/delete operation

		 

		So,

		 

		<wsrf-rp:PutResourcePropertiesDocument>

		<xs:any/>

		</wsrf-rp:PutResourcePropertiesDocument>

		 

		<wsrf-rp:PutResourcePropertiesDocumntResponse>

		<xs:any>?

		</wsrf-rp:PutResourcePropertiesDocumntResponse>

		 

		The return is: either an empty element, or if the
current document is different than the one submitted, then the contents
of the current document. The response MAY be a fault.

		 

		-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com
<mailto:igor.sedukhin@ca.com> )
		-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749