Comment on proposal to BINDINGS-89

Comments on proposed resolution to BINDINGS-89
"BJC20008 and BJC20014 are unclear"

I'm not sure that whether the resources
are within the JEE node or not is what the statements are addressing, its
whether or not the given name can be used to create a resource or not.

Given my comment on BINDINGS-88, I think
that we would end up with two statements that say pretty much the same
thing, except one is a SHOULD and one a MUST:

If the connection/@create attribute
is “always”, and the resource identified by the @name attribute cannot
be created at the specified location then the SCA runtime MUST raise an
error [BJC20007]. 

The SCA runtime SHOULD raise an error
if the connection/@create attribute value is “always” and the element
with the given name already exists [BJC20008]. 

In the JMS spec, we don't have SHOULD
for any of these cases.  I'm not sure why we would want to leave the
door open to SCA runtimes ignoring the requirement specified that a new
connection factory or activation spec be created, so if we go with my proposal
for BINDINGS-88, I think the answer for BINDINGS-89 is to just remove BJC20008
and BJC20014.

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth

STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair

MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK

Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898

Internet - 

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

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