[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp-conformance] WSRP Conformance statements
Some comments inline. Regards, Subbu Rich Thompson wrote: > > Having extracted these statements, I would suggest some rewording so > that they can stand on their own better (changes in this color): > > _CS180:_ The optional portletHandles parameter provides a means for a > Consumer to restrict the set of Portlets for which it is requesting > *getServiceDescription *return information. When the Consumer does not > supply this parameter, the Producer MUST return a portletDescription for > each of the “Producer Offered Portlets” the Consumer has access to > through the supplied registrationContext > > _CS186:_ If the nillable response from this > operation*getRegistrationLifetime* is nil, then scheduled destruction is > not in use for this registration and the Consumer MUST use the > *deregister* operation to destroy the registration Just to make sure I'm reading too deap into this, the Consumer is never required to send deregister or destroyPortlets requests. Right? > _CS188:_ If the nillable response from this > operation*getPortletLifetime* is nil, then scheduled destruction is not > in use for this registration and the Consumer MUST use the > *destroyPortlets* operation to destroy the registration Should read "If the nillable response from this operation getPortletLifetime is nil, then scheduled destruction is not in use for this portlet and the Consumer MUST use the destroyPortlets operation to destroy the portlet". The current text is referring to registration and not portlets. > _CS189:_ When not returning a fault, the Producer MUST return exactly > one entry in its response for each entry in the request to *copyPortlets*. > > _CS191:_ When not returning a fault, the Producer MUST return exactly > one entry in its response for each entry in the request to > *exportPortlets*. > > _CS196:_ Overlap of extension elements with the fields defined in the > containing structure SHOULD be voided. Could we reword this to say that "Implementations SHOULD NOT use types used within the containing structure as extension elements." It is not clear what overlap means. > > Rich > > > *Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS* > > 05/13/05 03:32 PM > > > To > wsrp-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org > cc > > Subject > [wsrp-conformance] Groups - WSRP Conformance statements.xls uploaded > > > > > > > > > The document revision named WSRP Conformance statements.xls has been > submitted by Rich Thompson to the WSRP Conformance SC document repository. > This document is revision #18 of WSRP Conformance statements.xls. > > Document Description: > Added worksheet for the delta in conformance statements for v2. > > View Document Details: > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/wsrp-conformance/document.php?document_id=12625 > > Download Document: > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/wsrp-conformance/download.php/12625/WSRP%20Conformance%20statements.xls > > Revision: > This document is revision #18 of WSRP Conformance statements.xls. The > document details page referenced above will show the complete revision > history. > > > PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email application > may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and paste > the entire link address into the address field of your web browser. > > -OASIS Open Administration > > From - Thu
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]