My +1 too.
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:
From:
David Booz <>
To:
Date:
18/11/2009 12:47
Subject:
Re: [sca-bindings] Re: Issue BINDINGS-107
+1 If it turns out that standardizing such a mechanism
does become something of great utility, we can easily add it in a future
version without breaking anything. Plus we'd have some real use cases on
which to base the design.
Dave Booz
STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
"Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093
e-mail:
Simon
Holdsworth ---11/18/2009 06:06:04 AM---Folks, here's my opinion on BINDINGS-107,
I'd appreciate your comments/opinions.
From:
Simon Holdsworth <>
To:
Date:
11/18/2009 06:06 AM
Subject:
[sca-bindings] 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
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
