- From: David Snelling <David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:48:42 +0100
- To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Cc: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Yves, You are right at the semantic level - either we tweak the meaning of the T.Put operation (as proposed in WS-Frag) or the we tweak the meaning of the whole WS-T spec. WS-Frag is intended to address a number of important (but not central) use cases. Therefore, I agree with the current approach that aims to clarify things for the implementers extending T with Frag and to avoid confusing those that only want to implement T but who are aware of Frag. On 25 Sep 2009, at 09:00, Yves Lafon wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Doug Davis wrote: > >> was going to save this for the f2f but..... >> T.Create() and T.Delete() are used to create/delete entire >> resources - >> using it to do something else (like _not_ creating/deleting a >> resource) >> would violate the extensibility rules of Transfer where it talks >> about > You can apply the same logic for T.Put() then. If you think that > fragment is a way to identify sub-resources within a more global > resource, then both T.Put()/Create()/Delete() will apply. > I don't think that adding two ways of doing what seems to be the > same thing is helping simplicity and understanding. > >> extensions spec not contradicting the base spec. The way to think >> about >> ws-frag is that it defines the "instructions" for how to get the >> Put done. >> Put is still updating the resource, its just instead of doing a >> blind XML >> copy-n-replace, we're passing in an instruction for how to do the >> update >> but the semantics/purpose of the operation is still the same. >> >> 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. >> >> >> >> Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> >> Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org >> 09/24/2009 12:50 PM >> >> To >> Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS >> cc >> public-ws-resource-access@w3.org >> Subject >> Re: WS-Fragment uploaded >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, Doug Davis wrote: >> >>> All, >>> Ram and I have just checked in ws-frag [1] for the WG's >>> consideration. >>> There are still a couple of minor things that need to be cleaned >>> up - >> like >>> fixing up the xsd - there's a list of open questions at the bottom >>> of >> the >>> doc. But we think this is a pretty good starting point. If the WG >>> approves of this direction then we're hoping that it will remove the >> need >>> for the RT spec. >> >> I have a question about the introduction of 'mode' in fragment PUT >> mode has three different values: >> http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-fra/Modes/Replace >> http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-fra/Modes/Insert >> and >> http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-fra/Modes/Remove >> >> Put+Remove sounds awfully like a Delete, and Put+Insert looks also >> awfully >> >> like a Create. (and Put+Replace looks like... a Put) >> So why adding another axis of extensibility to duplicate what's >> already >> there? >> >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/edcopies/wsfrag.html >>> >>> 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. >> >> > > -- > Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras. > > ~~Yves > > Take care: Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com > Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited Hayes Park Central Hayes End Road Hayes, Middlesex UB4 8FE Reg. No. 4153469 +44-7590-293439 (Mobile) ______________________________________________________________________ Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE Registered No. 4153469 This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of addressee(s) and may contain information which is privileged and confidential. Unauthorised use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that this e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan and McAfee Groupshield does not guarantee that it has not been intercepted or amended nor that it is virus-free.
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 07:49:18 UTC