wsdm message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm] Relationships call
- From: "Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
- To: "Zhili Zhang" <zhili@tibco.com>,<wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:57:41 -0400
Title: Relationships call
That is fine. This is essentially what the dialect +
multiple references approach originally suggested except that no
particular statement exists about the <xs:any/>.
I think what we've come up at the F2F
was
<muws:Participant Role="...">
<wsa:EnpointReference>...EPR of the
manageability endpoint...</wsa:EndpointReference>?
<muws:ResourceID>...identity of the
manageable resource...</muws:ResourceID>?
{any}*
</muws:Participant>
That
is a manageable web service participant could be expressed as follows, for
example,
<muws:Participant Role="...">
<wsa:EnpointReference>...manageability
EPR...</wsa:EndpointReference>
<muws:ResourceID>urn:uuid:{0AB-...-E89}</muws:ResourceID>
<mows:EndpointReference>...functional/operational
EPR...</mows:EndpointReference>
</muws:Participant>
A non
manageable (from the reporter point of view) Web service participant could
be expressed as follows.
<muws:Participant Role="...">
<mows:EndpointReference>...functional/operational
EPR...</mows:EndpointReference>
</muws:Participant>
The net of this and what you're proposing is
the same, IMO, except for the "geography" of the XML
elements.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza,
Islandia, NY 11788
I am interested in "Relationships" topic
as there are still many open issues. I will attend next week call if
there is one. Here is a follow-up on "relationship scope". Please
comments.
In F2F discussion of relationship
scope issue on Tuesday, HP, TIBCO and few others expressed their need to allow
including of any resource in a relationship. A resource can not be
excluded from a relationship simply because it is not WSDM manageable. It can be
used in many ways such as displayed in a service map, included in the list of
impacted resource for root-cause analysis etc..
If we allow any resource in a
relationship, then a participant in the relationship is either WSDM manageable
or not WSDM manageable (external resource). We are therefore reducing the
alternative to two types of participants:
A WSDM Manageable Resource
participant would be represented as:
<muws:Participant
Role='...'>
<muws:ManageableResource>
<EPR> . . . </EPR>
<muws:ResourceId> . . . <muws:ResourceId/>
</muws:ManageableResource>?
</muws:Participant>
All non WSDM Manageable Resource
participant would be represented as:
<muws:Participant
Role='...'>
<muws:ExternalResource>
{xs:any}*
</muws:ExternalResource>
</muwsParticipant>
The xs:any is a property bag that can
contain any domain specific things. For a non-manageable web service, an EPR
would be used inside the <muws:ExternalRsource> tag.
As an alternative, the name
"ExternalResource" could be called "NonManageableResource".
Thanks
Zhili
Zhang
TIBCO
Software Inc.
Yo, folks! There were only William, Bryan and me on the
call. There is no reason to schedule a 2hr call and agree on that at the F2F
if we're the only ones interetsted in that topic. We already have agreed among
us even before the F2F...
So,
do we need to continue the 2hr "Relationships" calls on Friday 1-2pm ET?
Interested parties, please respond.
-- Igor Sedukhin
.. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza,
Islandia, NY 11788
I'll be 10 minutes lates to the
call.
Just as a reminder: the call-in
number is the same as a regular call.
--
Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza,
Islandia, NY 11788
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]