RE: [Bug 8193] Fragment: Replace mode could be clearer

Ram,
  Take a step back and forget about fragments for a moment.  If the client 
in your situation only had full Put at its disposable then it would be 
left with the choice of doing something based on whether the final 
resource representation matched what it wanted and nothing more.  The 
exact soap messages aren't really of interest to the client - what matters 
is getting the resource to look like what it wants.  Fragment Put should 
be the same.  If a client really wants to do different things based on 
whether there is something already present in the resource then it needs 
to be the same for full Put and fragment Put - remember Fragment Put is 
just an optimization. And in the case of full Put, the way the client does 
this is by examining the resource's representation either before or after 
the Put. Trying to embed this conditionality into the service's fragment 
Put logic breaks the model of fragment Put just being an optimization.
  To make my point, look at an example of full Put:
original resource A:
  <foo/>
original resource B:
  <foo>
    <bar/>
  </foo>
Put request contains:
  <foo>
    <xyz/>
  </foo>

Whether we're updating resource A or resource B, does it really matter 
whether people conceptually think of it as a Replace or Insert?  It 
doesn't in the full Put case, so why do we care in the fragment Put case? 
I content that it doesn't - what matters is that the end result is what 
the client wants.

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.



Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
01/23/2010 06:30 PM

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

Subject
RE: [Bug 8193] Fragment: Replace mode could be clearer






Allowing a Replace to act like an Insert can cause problems. For example, 
a client logic may be such that it may do action A upon successful 
completion of an insert and action B upon successful completion of a 
Replace. If the resource allowed a Replace to pass through as if it was an 
Insert, then the client logic (action B) will do the wrong thing since it 
assumes the existence of a node in the representation that was replaced. 
To avoid this situation and to ensure that the client view and the service 
view of the resource are in sync, it is important to keep the semantics of 
Replace and Insert distinct.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
[mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ram 
Jeyaraman
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 11:03 AM
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 8193] Fragment: Replace mode could be clearer

For the Put operation: The Insert mode should add new items, Delete mode 
should remote items, and Replace should modify existing items.

Along the same lines, if a Replace is operated on a non-existent item, 
then a fault should be raised.

-----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: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 3:34 PM
To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 8193] Fragment: Replace mode could be clearer

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8193





--- Comment #1 from Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>  2009-11-04 23:34:08 --- 
Frag says:
--
[Body]/wst:Put/wsf:Fragment/wsf:Expression@Mode="
http://www.w3.org/2009/09/ws-fra/Modes/Replace"

    When the Mode attribute is set to a value of "
http://www.w3.org/2009/09/ws-fra/Modes/Replace" the resource 
representation specified within the Value element MUST replace the entire 
resource representation referenced by the children of the Expression 
element, if it exists. 
--

While its implied that if the Expression points to something that doesn't 
exist it should just add it, we need to make it clear.

Proposal:
Add to the end of the above text add:
--
If it doesn't exist then the Value is simply added to the resource 
representation.
--


--
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.