wsrp-wsia message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [wsrp-wsia] [I#142] Doesn't CloneEntity have to be in Base interface?
- From: Gil Tayar <Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com>
- To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 12:49:43 +0200
Issue: 142
Status: Active
Topic:
interface
Class: Technical
Raised by: Michael Freedman
Title: Doesn't
CloneEntity have to be in Base interface?
Date Added: 3-Nov-2002
Document
Section: -
Description:
If issue #57 is resolved to keep our
current unified refHandle then doesn't this mean that CloneEntity has to be in
our Base interface? The reasoning is that once refHandles exist then
CloneEntity has two purposes. It both clones the entity and clones the
refHandle. This means the following permutations are supported:
a)
UserPersistence/Session => clone both entity and session
b) UserPersisetnce/No Session => clone only the entity
c) NoUserPersistence/Session => clone only the session
d) NoUserPersistence/No Session => cloning not
supported
Permutation (c) exists if the producer
entity isn't clonable but does have/manage transient state.
We currently have cloneEntity in the
Entity interface because we felt this operation (and the others in this
interface) are only necessary if the entity can be cloned. However
permutation (c) above if a situation where CloneEntity has meaning but doesn't
involve cloning the entities persistent state. Thus making the operation a
Base operation.
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC