Venkata Krishnan wrote:
Hi,

The prev. mail seemed to have a chewed up subject.  So resending with a
better subject line.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Subject: [Discussion] Conversational Polic
To: [email protected]


Hi,

Here is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2112 where Vamsi is
describing the following : -

*"I have been doing some digging into the conversational semantics.  One of
the things I have noticed is that when the service is marked with
conversational intent, the reference created for the callback does not
inherit that intent.  Should it be that the callback is marked
conversational separate from the service?
>
Yes, if the callback interface isn't so marked.

                                           Also, is it up to the service to
mark operations on the callback with an EndsConveration intent?"
*
Both the service and reference would have to do this if the
callback interface isn't so marked.  However, I don't know how
this would be done, as the <callback> element doesn't allow for
<operation> sub-elements.

I guess the reference that gets created for the callback doesn't seem to
copy this over, which is something that I will dig up and fix.

It should not be copied automatically from the service, as it's possible
to have a non-conversational callback for a conversational service.

But I'd like to get a bit of clarity on the inheritance of the intent here.
A service could be having 'authentication' as a required intent.  Now if
that gets to be inherited by the 'callback' element it seem a bit odd to
me.  The callback should only have intents that the 'calledBack' service
has, isn't it.   Am I missing something from the inheritance rules here ?

I'm not familiar with the inheritance rules so I can't comment on
this part.

  Simon

Thanks

- Venkat



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to