OASIS Web Services Interactive Applications TC

RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][E904]

  • 1.  RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][E904]

    Posted 05-06-2002 14:59
     MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    wsia message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Subject: RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][E904]


    
    The statefulness we have talked about includes transient state related to a
    running instance of a Producer's service. This requirement is attempting to
    capture the need to persist some state information such that it can be used
    even after a cycling of the Producer's service.
    
    
    
                                                                                                                     
                          Rex Brooks                                                                                 
                          <rexb@starbourne.        To:       Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS,                         
                          com>                      <wsia@lists.oasis-open.org>                                      
                                                   cc:                                                               
                          05/06/2002 12:51         Subject:  RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][E904]                     
                          PM                                                                                         
                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                     
    
    
    
    Rich,
    
    I am just sending this to you because I want to find out if I am
    wrong about this before submitting it to the group as a whole.
    Especially since it is actually one of those areas where we need this
    as an upper level requirement as opposed to what I have already said
    in regard to specifying lower level particulars. Also, our language
    is meandering into equivocations, and I don't want to sound too
    emphatic, but:
    
    I thought statefullness was the default condition. So wouldn't it be
    more concise and terse to say
    
    >E904
    This specification SHOULD include operations and semantics to
    determine the current state of any instances of the Producer's
    service.
    
    Of course then the question becomes: does a consumer need to have a
    recent or long term history of the state of any instance of the
    producer's service? And chasing that implication down into lower
    levels is exactly where I think we would get bogged down.
    
    I'll shut up now.
    
    Rex
    
    At 11:33 AM -0400 5/6/02, Rich Thompson wrote:
    >Even Lifecycle has been used in ways that confuse this (Lifecycle
    >discussion includes the discovery of the existence of a service) ... I
    >think we are trying to capture the persistence between different instances
    >of a Producer's service. How about:
    >
    >E904
    >This specification SHOULD include operations and semantics related to
    >persisting and using stateful information by instances of the Producer's
    >service.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    
    >                       Gil
    >Tayar
    
    >                       <Gil.Tayar@webcol        To:       Rich
    >Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS,
    >                       lage.com>
    >"'wsia@lists.oasis-open.org'" <wsia@lists.oasis-open.org>
    >
    >cc:
    >                       05/06/2002 08:44         Subject:  RE:
    >[wsia][wsia-requirements][E904]
    >
    >AM
    
    >
    >
    
    >
    >
    
    >
    >
    >
    >I agree - we have been evading this terminology issue for two long. How
    >about rewording to use a consensual word - "Lifecycle":
    >
    >E904
    >This specification should include operations and semantics
    >related to persisting stateful information between *Producer lifecycles*.
    >
    >
    >This also pertains to E902.
    >
    >