W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > December 2009

RE: [Bug 8202] New: MEX: definition of GetMetata/Dialect is a bit off

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:36:57 +0000
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
CC: "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4F4942E980BD7147AE7F7D3DCB9CBA9F2BF099A2@TK5EX14MBXC138.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Sounds like a good minimum to declare victory!

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Asir Vedamuthu
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 8202] New: MEX: definition of GetMetata/Dialect is a bit off


"If there are no metadata sections... then it MUST include zero metadata sections"  seems a bit odd/redundant.

Minor tweak:
"When this repeating OPTIONAL element is present, the response MUST include only Metadata Sections corresponding to metadata specified by the combination of the URI, Identifier and Content attributes of each of the Dialect elements. For each Dialect element if there is no metadata for that combination of attributes then the response MUST NOT include any Metadata Sections for that Dialect element."

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.

Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org

12/14/2009 11:12 AM

To

"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>

cc

Subject

RE: [Bug 8202] New: MEX: definition of GetMetata/Dialect is a bit  off







>only Metadata Sections corresponding to the Metadata matching the selection
criteria specified

We are afraid that neither 'matching' nor 'the selection criteria' are defined by the WS-MetadataExchange specification. Are these implementation details?

Let's attempt to re-write the paragraph without those two phrases ...

"When this repeating OPTIONAL element is present, the response MUST include only Metadata Sections corresponding to Dialects specified by the combination of URI, Identifier and Content attributes of each of the Dialect element; if the receiver does not have any Metadata Sections of the indicated Dialects, the response MUST include zero Metadata Sections."

However, Dialect is defined as an IRI that indicates the format and version of a metadata unit contained in a Metadata Section. So, neither the Identifier nor the Content attribute sounds like a sub property of a Dialect.

Perhaps, we should think about a GetMetadata/Filter wrapper that wraps the Dialect, Identifier and Content attributes.

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:59 AM
To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 8202] New: MEX: definition of GetMetata/Dialect is a bit off

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8202

          Summary: MEX: definition of GetMetata/Dialect is a bit off
          Product: WS-Resource Access
          Version: FPWD
         Platform: PC
       OS/Version: Windows XP
           Status: NEW
         Severity: normal
         Priority: P2
        Component: MetadataExchange
       AssignedTo: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
       ReportedBy: dug@us.ibm.com
        QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org


For GetMetadata/Dialect the spec says:
--
[Body]/mex:GetMetadata/mex:Dialect
   When this repeating OPTIONAL element is present, the response MUST include
only Metadata Sections corresponding to the Dialect specified by the IRI
attribute; if the receiver does not have any Metadata Sections of the indicated
Dialect, the response MUST include zero Metadata Sections.
--

Couple of problems with this:
1 - its not 100% accurate. At the Dialect element level to only talk about
how the response needs to only include metadata of this Dialect URI w/o any
mention of the @Identifier and @Content attributes is misleading.
2 - this paragraph repeats what the definition of the @URI attribute says
3 - the @URI definition text is better since it ends with:
    ...the response MUST include zero Metadata Sections for this IRI.
   the "for this IRI" removes some possible confusion.  The current wording
   above could be interpreted to mean that if there are multiple
   Dialect elements and any one of them fails to match something then the
   entire response MUST not include ANY Metadata sections at all - even for
   other Dialects.

Proposal:
Modify the above text to be:
--
When this repeating OPTIONAL element is present, the response MUST include
only Metadata Sections corresponding to the Metadata matching the selection
criteria specified. If the receiver does not have any Metadata Sections
matching the selection criteria the response MUST include zero Metadata
Sections for this Dialect element.
--
and leave the definition of each attribute to get more specific.


--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:37:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:18:16 GMT