Resolution text for Issue wsrf 25

[Tim Banks <tim_banks@uk.ibm.com>]

Steve,

Some comments on the resolution of issue 25.

   I see no schema describing the <ResourcePropertyChangeFailure> element
   in
   http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/download.php/11504/wsrf-WS-ResourceProperties-1.2-draft-06.xsd
   There is no schema to say where in a fault this element should go.
   The text says 'The fault message MUST also indicate whether the effects
   of processing previous components were restored or not. Any fault MAY
   contain a descendant element, named ResourcePropertyChangeFailure, that
   indicates the resource property element associated with the fault and
   indicates if the resource property document was restored.' To me, this
   leaves open the possibility of using another way of describing what has
   happened, which is too permissive.  I suggest: 'If multiple updates were
   present in the request, any fault MUST contain a descendant element...'.
   I find it rather odd to have an element which describes the effect on
   parts 1 to  n-1  of the multi-part set, but which contains details about
   part n.  It can be read as if the 'restoration' describes the effect on
   part  n alone.  The explanation of @Restored should say 'If the value of
   the attribute is "true" then the values of all resource properties
   processed during the operation are restored to their original values'.
   I propose the attribute be called 'DocumentRestored'.  Even better would
   be to have two elements: one describing the restoration, another
   describing the update that caused the fault.
   An example would be a good way to illustrate all this.
   The 'Restored' attribute is optional with a default of 'false'.
   Wouldn't it be simpler to make it compulsory?


Regards, Tim Banks
IBM TP Architecture & Technology. Hursley, UK.
Phone: External +44 1962 815639, Internal 245639