I would like to understand the use cases better for why we need to
support multiple databindings per service contract. Perhaps they are
marginal and could be accommodated by having a component offer
multiple services? If this is the case, I would prefer we follow
Jervis' recommendation and simplify things to one databinding per
service contract. Such use cases could be important so if anyone has
examples, please share them.
Jim
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: August 29, 2006 10:08:08 PM PDT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SCDL extensions to define data types for parameters
and return value
Reply-To: [email protected]
On Aug 29, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
I agree with you that only one databinding will be used for the
same interface for most cases.
I have a case that we need at least operation-level databinding.
For SCA reference/service with JCA bindings, we need databindings
to deal with the native EIS data format (for example, CCI record)
at "Interaction" level which usually maps to an operation in the
ServiceContract.
For your reference, there's EMD spec from IBM & BEA @ ftp://
www6.software.ibm.com/software/developer/library/j-emd/
EnterpriseMetadataDiscoverySpecification.pdf nad it talks about
DataBinding for SDO<-->EIS transformations.
Can you explain these use cases further?
Thanks,
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
