Re: [obix] Interoperability question?

I believe the correct behavior is to return an <err> on the next poll with the BadUriErr contract 

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Gemmill, Craig <> wrote:

Hi 
everyone-

 

Regarding the "list 
of interoperability issues", here is an interoperability question that has come up 
recently.

 

Scenario:A client 
creates a watch on the server, then begins polling it for changes.  Then at 
some point, the point being watched is removed from the server.  Should the 
server then provide some indication to the client in the next pollChanges() that 
this point no longer exists?

 

If so, what form 
should that indication take?

 

My inclination would 
be that this would be important information for the client to have, because 
otherwise it will continue thinking that the point is still holding the original 
value, which is no longer a valid assumption given that the point does not 
exist.  But, the format of this indication would need to be defined I 
think, since "point removal" indications could easily be interspersed with 
regular point value updates.

 

Craig

 

 

Maybe we should 
create a list on the TC site that tracks these issues?  Or maybe just add 
each one as a separate oasis issue?  Toby, what would work best from a 
documentation standpoint?