Re: query about /definitions/interface/operation/input etc.

That matches my understanding (that information is, in effect,
redundantly specified in the message exchange pattern description,
reflected in the messageName or messageReference (or whatever)
attribute, and in the element name).

Amy!
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:53:45 +0600
Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote:

> 
> We say currently that a message reference component has a property
> called direction (incoming or outgoing). The value of this property
> comes from whether the message reference is via <input> or via
> <output>.
> 
> Given that the operation has a pattern, it seems to me that 
> the direction is now redundantly specified. That is, the patttern
> will say that there are messages A, B & C and indicate which are
> going "in" and which are going "out". Based on the discussion Amy's
> leading on the name of the message reference attribute, we're likely
> to have something like:
>     <operation pattern="p1">
>       <input messageName="A" element=e1 headers=../>
>       ..
> etc. where the @messageName refers to the name given in the pattern
> spec for pattern p1. Thus, we now have two places where the direction
> of the "A" message is specified: by the pattern spec for pattern p1
> and by the user by using "<input messageName='A'..>" etc. instead of 
> "<output messageName='B'..>".
> 
> Is my understanding correct? At this point I'm just trying to make
> sure I got this right .. not certain that I will try to propose a
> change as I certainly understand the practical appeal of saying
> "<input>" etc. instead of something more cryptic that picks up the 
> direction from the pattern.
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com

Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2003 16:22:52 UTC