RE: Suggested Wording to Resolve Issues 6719 and 6720

It should be noted that the state maintenance of a metadata resource is at most subject to the "best efforts" of the hosting server. The hosting server may change the representation of a resource, may remove a resource entirely, or may bring back a resource that was deleted. And, a metadata resource state may evolve over time.

So, there aren't any grounds to impose any state maintenance related MUST requirements on a metadata resource.

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 11:07 AM
To: Asir Vedamuthu
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: Suggested Wording to Resolve Issues 6719 and 6720


For any _one_ metadata resource it always returns the same QName (Dialect). In other words, a metadata resource that returns WSDL today will not return Policy tomorrow.  There is no optionality about it.   The text is:
   As a result, the metadata returned by the Get request to a metadata resource's endpoint may be limited to a particular metadata type (@Dialect) and identifier (@Identifier).
When would the metadata from a T.Get() _not_ be limited to a particular dialect?  If its WSDL today and WSDL tomorrow, when would it ever return metadata from a different dialect?

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>

07/24/2009 02:00 PM

To

"ashok.malhotra@oracle.com" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS

cc

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

Subject

RE: Suggested Wording to Resolve Issues 6719 and 6720







+1 to Ashok. This is an attempt to clarify.

Read your comment on MAY. We simply do not understand why the MAY should be changed to MUST. The WS-MetadataExchange does not impose any such limitations on a metadata resource.

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ashok malhotra
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:26 AM
To: Doug Davis
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org; public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Suggested Wording to Resolve Issues 6719 and 6720

Doug, I would rather keep the second para as it makes the use of the MEX
dialect explicit.
Let's discuss on the call and see how others feel..  This is not a
showstopper!
All the best, Ashok


Doug Davis wrote:
>
> Hi Ashok,
>   it looks good - just a couple of minor suggested edits.
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> *ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>*
> Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
>
> 07/24/2009 11:00 AM
> Please respond to
> ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
>
>
>
> To
>                  "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
>                  Suggested Wording to Resolve Issues 6719 and 6720
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Attached
> --
> All the best, Ashok and Asir
> [attachment "Wording for Issue 6719 and 6720.doc" deleted by Doug
> Davis/Raleigh/IBM]