- From: Li, Li (Li) <lli5@avaya.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:11:45 -0500
- To: "Gilbert Pilz" <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, "Chou, Wu (Wu)" <wuchou@avaya.com>
- Message-ID: <7DC6C0F0E8D7C74FB4E1E73CC371280A01505AFE@300813ANEX2.global.avaya.com>
Gil, Thanks for the clarification. I think the table title and some state name confused me a bit. Now that I understand what you did, I think the states can be simplified. Based on your table, I drew a UML state chart that has only two states for the subscription, basically merging the "idle" and "end" states into a "null" state. I also feel that we don't need two tables (one for client and one for server), as one is sufficient for the purpose you stated in the "Notes on Reading the State Tables". Though I am used to diagrams, I am ok with table representations as well. For your reference, I am attaching a word file with the state chart. Best, Li Li ________________________________ From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:gilbert.pilz@oracle.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:38 AM To: Li, Li (Li) Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org; Chou, Wu (Wu) Subject: Re: issue 6435: v7 of the WS-Eventing state tables Li, You are correct, the state tables define the states and transitions during the lifetime of single instance of a subscription (or an enumeration in WS-Enum's case). Would it help if we labeled the columns as "Subscription States" ("Enumeration States"), or do you think something more explicit needs to be said about this? - gp On 1/26/2010 11:57 AM, Li, Li (Li) wrote: Gil, Thanks for the update. After reading the tables and the notes, I wasn't sure whose states we are describing. It appears that you are describing the states of the processes, e.g. subscriber/sink or event source/manager. However, this is difficult because each of these processes can handle many subscriptions simultaneously. As the result, the state tables have many empty cells that are undefined. So what you did is actually defining the states of those processes regarding one subscription. If this is the case, I think it is better to directly define the state transitions for the subscription, instead of the states of the processes. I think the information in the current tables can be reused. This would lead to a more concise and precise description of the behavior of the processes that developers care about. Thanks. Li Li
Attachments
- application/msword attachment: wse_statechart.doc
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 16:12:48 UTC