RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE-22: The Bindings specifications should provide exemplary Implementations for a) Callbacks and b) Conversations

Mike,

 

You wrote:

 

1) For conversational, since
this is an intent, a bindingType simply must list the
"conversational" intent in its 

@alwaysProvides
or @mayProvide
attribute - if @mayProvide, then there needs to 

also
be a PolicySet which contains a policy which provides the
"conversational" 

intent.

This isn’t
the way the algorithm works.  If intent “foo” is listed in a
bindingType/@mayProvide list, then _no_
policySets need to be supplied for this intent.  If the user requires it,
it will be provided by the binding.

PolicySets
are needed in order to get support for intents that are not mentioned in either
the @alwaysProvides or @mayProvides.

Michael

 

 

From: Mike
Edwards [mailto:] 

Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008
11:15 AM

To: OASIS Bindings

Subject: RE: [sca-bindings]
ISSUE-22: The Bindings specifications should provide exemplary Implementations
for a) Callbacks and b) Conversations

 

Peter, 

Interesting
question - and an interesting answer too. 

1)
For conversational, since this is an intent, a bindingType simply must list the
"conversational" intent in its 

@alwaysProvides
or @mayProvide
attribute - if @mayProvide, then there needs to 

also
be a PolicySet which contains a policy which provides the
"conversational" 

intent.

2)
For callback, we have a problem.  There is no intent "callback"
at the moment.  Callbacks are defined by 

various
mechanisms, but none of them are intents. 

So,
there is no obvious mechanism by which a bindingType can indicate that it
supports callbacks. 

Perhaps
we should invent a new intent "callback" and then also define that it
is "automatically" set whenever 

there
is other metadata that indicates that there is a callback interface - it can
also be specified explictly using 

the
@requires attribute. If that is done, then a bindingType can indicate its
support as for conversational. 

Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.

Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.

IBM Hursley
Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21
  2JN, Great Britain.

Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  

Email:   

 

  
  
"Peshev, Peter"
  <> 

  
21/02/2008 16:02 

  
  
  
   

    
    
To

    
    
    
"Eric Johnson"
    <>, Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB 

    
   

   

    
    
cc

    
    
    
"OASIS Bindings"
    <> 

    
   

   

    
    
Subject

    
    
    
RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE-22: The Bindings specifications
    should provide exemplary Implementations for a) Callbacks and b)
    Conversations

    
   

  
  
 

  
   

    
    
 

    
    
    
 

    
   

  
  

  
 

Hi, 

  

just a question about that issue, how a binding should
declare the support or lack of support of those features. Is it by
 intents "Callbackable" , "Conversational" ,
"NotSupportedCallback" , etc. ? 

  

Peter 

From: Eric
Johnson [mailto:] 

Sent: Monday, 4. February 2008 21:45

To: Mike Edwards

Cc: OASIS Bindings

Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] ISSUE-22: The Bindings specifications
should provide exemplary Implementations for a) Callbacks and b) Conversations

Logged as http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-22

-Eric.

Mike Edwards wrote: 

Raiser:                Mike Edwards

Target:                Web Services
Binding specification, JMS Binding Specification, JCA Binding Specification

Description: 

At present, it is not clear which, if any, of the Bindings specifications enable
the implementation of two important 

features of SCA described in the Assembly specification - namely Callback
interfaces and Conversational 

interfaces. 

Each of the Bindings specifications should explicitly declare if it is possible
to support each of these features. 

For each of the Bindings specifications that claim to support either or both of
these features, the specification 

should provide a full description of at least one exemplary implementation of
the feature using the Binding 

technology described in the specification.  Multiple alternative
implementations are permitted and may be 

added to the specification. 

For example, it may be possible to implement Callbacks using WS-Addressing
capabilities with Web services. 

If so, and example, showing the use of appropriate features of WS-Addressing
and other relevant WS-* 

capabilities should be added to the specification.   If an alternative
exists using (say) WS-Context, then an 

example based on that technology can also be provided. 

Proposal: 

None at present. 

Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.

Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.

IBM Hursley
Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21
  2JN, Great Britain.

Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  

Email:  

 

Unless stated
otherwise above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England
and Wales
with number 741598. 

Registered office: PO Box 41,
  North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates
this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 

 

Unless stated
otherwise above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England
and Wales
with number 741598. 

Registered office: PO Box 41,
  North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU