20 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.sca-jRe: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Mike Edwards | Apr 28, 2009 12:37 am | |
| Simon Nash | Apr 28, 2009 4:39 am | |
| David Booz | Apr 28, 2009 4:52 am |  .gif, .gif |
| Mike Edwards | Apr 28, 2009 5:58 am | |
| David Booz | Apr 28, 2009 6:10 am | .gif, .gif |
| Simon Nash | Apr 28, 2009 6:34 am | |
| David Booz | Apr 28, 2009 1:10 pm | .gif, .gif |
| Mike Edwards | Apr 28, 2009 2:44 pm | |
| Simon Nash | Apr 29, 2009 2:11 pm | |
| Simon Nash | Apr 29, 2009 2:15 pm | |
| David Booz | Apr 30, 2009 10:49 am | .gif, .gif |
| Simon Nash | Apr 30, 2009 11:09 am | |
| Simon Nash | Apr 30, 2009 12:28 pm | |
| Mike Edwards | May 1, 2009 1:13 am | |
| Anish Karmarkar | May 1, 2009 4:23 pm | |
| Anish Karmarkar | May 1, 2009 4:28 pm | |
| Simon Nash | May 2, 2009 3:41 am | |
| Mike Edwards | May 7, 2009 7:31 am | |
| Mike Edwards | May 7, 2009 7:35 am | |
| Mike Edwards | May 7, 2009 7:48 am |
| Subject: | Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Section 10.13 on @OneWay requires a normative statement | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Simon Nash (oas...@cjnash.com) | |
| Date: | Apr 28, 2009 4:39:39 am | |
| List: | org.oasis-open.lists.sca-j | |
Mike, I agree that this needs to be made normative.
I had always thought that @OneWay applied only to interface methods. The reference to class methods (in the original text and your proposal) surprises and intrigues me, because this suggests that @OneWay could be applied to a service implementation method without being applied to the corresponding interface method. If this is legal, it would mean that the client invokes the service synchronously, and the service returns back to the client immediately and dispatches the method for subsequent execution.
Do we want to allow this interaction pattern? If we do want to allow it, then I think we need to make this more explicit in the text.
Simon
Mike Edwards wrote:
*** NB I am happy for this new issue to be treated as a comment on the Public Review draft - I just don't want this item lost ***
Raiser: Mike Edwards
Target: sca-javacaa-1.1-spec-cd02-rev6.doc
Description:
There is a sentence in section 10.13 about @OneWay which in effect describes a normative requirement but is not in the form of a normative statement:
Lines 1923 - 1925:
"The @OneWay annotation is used on a Java interface or class method to indicate that invocations will be dispatched in a non-blocking fashion as described in the section on Asynchronous Programming."
This must be recast into the form of a normative statement
Proposal:
Replace lines 1923 - 1925 with the following normative statement:
When a Java interface method or a Java class method is annotated with @OneWay, the SCA runtime MUST ensure that all invocations of that method are executed in a non-blocking fashion, as described in the section on Asynchonous Programming. [JCA90052]
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: mike...@uk.ibm.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ /
/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/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php