[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrm] Version 0.3 of the schema
Hi Eugene, "Sindambiwe, Eugene" wrote: > Sunil, > I took me some time to look at the modifications. All of them seem correct. Just Thanks for doing the review. > > few rather comments: The schema encapsulates only resolved and tentative resolutions, your comments (1) and (2) require changes to the Spec. Could you table them as Spec. issues and we could then discuss them in the con. calls? If we decided to do so, I can update the schema then. > > 1. How do you need both the "RefToSequenceNumberRangeType" and the "SequenceNumberRangeType". I would suggest to use only one type and may be to rename it just "NumberRangeType", or "MessageNumberRangeType" I had similar lingering doubts when I was writing the schema. I'd keep both the names as SequenceNumberRange and the type would be SequenceNumberRangeType. > 2. I personally would have preferred to use "AckRequested", "DuplicateElimination", and "MessageOrder" as optional boole-valued attributes rather than empty elements with multiplicity 0-1. But this is just a matter of taste. Issue then would be what should be the defaults? If the defaults are assumed to be 'false', then in the case where MessageOrder (MO) exists and DuplicateElimination (DE) and AckRequested (AR) doesn't exists, then it will be semantically confusing as MO requires DE and AR as the absence of the latter 2 indicate as 'false'. If they are not optional, then requiring DE and AR to exist and be 'true' for MO case is user unfriendly. Comments??? > > 3. Using the convention that the absence of any "SequenceNumberStatus" is equivalent to status "continue", the "SequenceNumberStatusType" would even only two values. But since the attribute is Not necessarily. It is not wrong to use this attribute and have a value as 'Continue'. So we need to list the 3 values. Btw, I don't know how to say the default as 'Continue' if it is a 'enum' type? I can investigate, but if any schema experts can help me right top of their head, it will be great. -Sunil > -----Original Message----- > From: Sunil Kunisetty [mailto:Sunil.Kunisetty@oracle.com] > Sent: Dienstag, 4. November 2003 00:54 > To: wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [wsrm] Version 0.3 of the schema > > All - > > Attached is v0.3 of the schema based on the "tentative" resolutions. > See the "Change Log"for details. > > Comments??? > > -Sunil
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]