On Aug 21, 2006, at 4:21 PM, Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
I think the SPI models for SCDL service/reference/binding are now
becoming out of sync with the SCA spec. The introduction of
BindlessServiceDefinition (I view it as a service with NullBinding)
also worries me.
We discussed this with Ignacio and part of the issue depends on how
you look at it: a composite service viewed from the outside is part
of the component type for the composite impl. Ignacio, do you want to
elaborate?
Here's the SCDL syntax extracted from the SCA spec 0.96 draft.
<service name="xs:NCName" multiplicity="0..1 or 1..1 or 0..n or
1..n"?>*
<interface/>
<binding uri="xs:anyURI"?/>*
<reference>wire-target-URI</reference>+
</service>
<reference name="xs:NCName" override="sca:OverrideOptions"?
multiplicity="0..1 or 1..1 or 0..n or 1..n"?>*
<interface/>
<binding uri="xs:anyURI"?/>*
</reference>
I plan to some changes to the models to reflect the spec as
attached below. With the updated model, the BindingBuilder could
simply deal with the binding contained by either the
ServiceDefinition or ReferenceDefinition.
What do you guys think?
Raymond, can you summarize the changes you are proposing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
