OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp-wsia message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] Roles

What I am saying is that we either need to clearly define the semantics
(including how roles can be mapped when there is no match in the
granularity of role definitions) or drop all concept of roles from the
spec. Note that the later case does not eliminate using roles when both
sides agree on how to do this (e.g. JSR109), but rather leaves this area to
other specifications the end-points also choose to support.

                      Abdelnur                 To:                                                                 
                      <alejandro.abdeln        cc:       wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org                            
                      ur@sun.com>              Subject:  Re: [wsrp-wsia] Roles                                     
                      11/26/2002 12:54                                                                             


Are you suggesting to drop the predefined roles from the spec?


Rich Thompson wrote:

      This mapping works reasonably in a J2EE environment because the
      of role definitions doesn't vary too dramatically. As a web service
      WSRP had better worry about cross platform issues as well. As soon as
      moves out of the J2EE world, the chances that the granularity of role
      definitions is close drops precipitously.

      Rex suggested the role fields could just be optional ... they are,
      but what
      this means for a Consumer that doesn't use roles and wants to use the
      maximum number of Producers is pretending they support the spec
      roles (e.g. mapping whatever internal access control mechanisms are
      in use
      to the spec defined roles) and trying to map these onto the Producer
      published roles. I assert this will fail miserably more than it will

                            Andre Kramer

                            <andre.kramer@eu.        To:
                            citrix.com>              cc:

                                                     Subject:  RE:
      [wsrp-wsia] Roles
                            11/26/2002 08:48


      J2EE also has the concept of role mapping in that a developer can
      write her
      application in terms of her usual set of roles. The deployer of the
      application can then map those roles, at deployment time, using a
      simple XML role reference description mechanism. I view wsrp consumer
      as the analogue of the J2EE developer's role set, the consumer Portal
      as the analogue of the application deployer (at service registration
      and the role names on the wire as the J2EE container roles. So, we
      potentially have two similar mappings of roles: consumer to producer
      168 Portlet to J2EE Container? Each requiring human intervention.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
      Sent: 26 November 2002 12:52
      To: Martin Bryan
      Cc: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
      Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] Roles

      I have had the uneasy feeling about roles for a while, but rewriting
      sections finally caused me to focus on it enough to see the detailed
      reasons why (you site some good examples). At this point I think it
      is only
      useful to that set of Consumer-Producer pairs that have a coordinated
      of roles and since we won't be able to define tight semantics it
      belong in the spec.

      On the address side, the variations in address are a big issue and
      WSRP is
      not the right place to tackle it. We took guidance from the P3P data
      in this area though we did need to provide some structure for their
      unstructured portions. I was hoping much of the variability could go
      the field named street as this is an array of strings. In addition,
      each of
      the structures is individually extensible with the expectation that
      some of
      those extensions will come back for consideration as base level
      fields in
      v2. If there are other sources that would give a more
      view of this area, we certainly would appreciate a pointer ....

                            "Martin Bryan"

                            <mtbryan@sgml.u-n        To:       Rich
                            et.com>                  cc:

                                                     Subject:  Re:
      Draft spec v0.85
                            11/25/2002 11:35



            Reflecting on this further, the whole schema of role mapping
            only really
            works when there is a huge overlap in the roles supported at
            the Producer
            and the Consumer. To me this is more and more smelling like


            belongs as an extension rather than an inherent part of the

      At last you are beginning to see the problem. Now consider what
      happens if
      the Producer is Finnish and the Consumer is Japanese and both use
      their own
      languages to define their services. Now we have a real problem, which
      only be solved if you introduce a multilingual ontology of mapped
      the equation.

      The real problem, however, is how to do this dynamically, so that we
      annotate recorded roles with "related names from other sources" (e.g.
      that someone has determined, by some off-line means, that A relates
      to B).

      Incidentally your address info structure in section 10 has not been
      internationalized. You need techniques for defining subsections of
      what you
      call cities (e.g. Kensington, London) and for identifying blocks
      (both at
      street and house level) and subunits of buildings (flats or suites).
      example, I have a friend in Roumania for whose address I need to
      the flat number, the staircase, the block on the road (unless you
      26 a name!) and the district of the town in addition to the fields
      me to define once only if I want to send him something. It looks like
      going to have to define more extensions than you do base fields, even
      every different Consume and Producer will have to define his own set
      extensions for most of these :-(

      Martin Bryan
      The SGML Centre, 29 Oldbury Orchard, Churchdown, Glos GL3 2PU, UK
      Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029  E-mail: mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com

      For further details about The SGML Centre visit

      To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
      manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

      To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
      manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

      To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
      manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC