On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote: > 2892 If a reference does not have a binding, then the binding used can be > any of the bindings > 2893 specified by the service provider, as long as the intents attached to > the reference and > 2894 the service are all honoured.
That's interesting. So this is the OASIS Assembly Spec Sec. 8.5. I see a number of problems with this section: 1. By "reference does not have a binding" it is not clear if they are talking about the lack of a binding element (in which case the <binding.sca> might be set to be implicitly present) or the lack of a binding, period (in the case of this SCAClient-created proxy), or both. I'm guessing they mean both. This is a significant change from OSOA. But this is only a minor clarification needed. 2. 2876 ..... If the interface of the service or reference is remotable, then either 2877 the local or remote variant of the SCA binding will be used depending on whether source 2878 and target are co-located or not. This is confusing. It almost sounds like for a co-located service with a remotable interface, you would expect PBR instead of PBV. Though there must be a local vs. remotable variant of the SCA binding impl, there may or may not be a co-located vs. non-co-located variant. This text should probably just be deleted. 3. organization - This specification of a behavior about references shouldn't be buried in the "binding.sca" section of the spec. I haven't personally been participating in the OASIS spec discussions.. not sure if anyone is following this thread who is would agree that this is worth bringing up... or I could jump in that OASIS mailing list I guess. Scott
