Re: Issue BINDINGS-107

Folks, here's my opinion on BINDINGS-107,
I'd appreciate your comments/opinions.

The main purpose of having JMS and JCA
binding elements in the definitions file is to allow a single JMS/JCA application
to be accessed from several SCA references or services without having to
duplicate all the details of connection and operation mapping.  That's
primarily due to the fact that there's no standard service definition for
JMS/JCA applications.  Typically for service bindings, the information
is going to be specific to each exposed service so I would expect such
sharing to be mainly but not exclusively used for references.

There's no functional reason why we
require this mechanism. If we remove it from the spec it doesn't reduce
the capability of the bindings, it just means that SCA runtimes would possibly
need to provide their own way of managing sharing of such information outside
of the standard definitions.  Given that this is not a portability/interop
requirement I'd say its not that high a priority to be standardised.  If
we feel that the additional complexity that this brings to the JMS and
JCA bindings specs is not justified, then I don't feel particularly strongly
about removing it.

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