Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [stp-dev] Intermediate Hybrid Model Discussion

Hi David,

Thanks for the suggestions, they are both very useful. I think that in the new version of the model (that I just announced on the mailing list) the contract can be defined using properties, by creating a particular property definition (if it's an informal document this might work). Same for the 'metadata' map you mentioned. If the contract is a service definition, then perhaps our Service component would suffice as well, if we agree that for each contract, there is a service element (there is some conceptual overloading here, I know). For instance, in SCA, a service may have only one interface, so we'd not run into trouble with the current model. Let me know if you think that we lack expressivity with the Service and property elements, perhaps with an example.

Thanks,
Adrian.


On Aug 28, 2007, at 2:26 PM, David Bosschaert wrote:

Hi Adrian,

Thanks for posting that. This is certainly very useful.

Just a few additional ideas here:
On the meta model, it might be useful to have a Service Contract associated with the Service, as all types of Services typically have some sort of a contract or other - I know certain editors/ technologies may not deal with the interface directly, but its normally there somehow. This could be WSDL, a Java interface, XML Schema or even a worddoc describing how it's used. Also, it might be good to add a 'metadata' map to the Service where arbitrary key-value pairs can be registered. This could be used by editors to enhance the metamodel with optional extra metadata that the transformations could use to make the migration from one model to another smoother / less lossy.

Just my 2c,

David

Adrian Mos wrote:
Hi David, all,

I have created a page that illustrates a sample scenario involving the meta-model at http://wiki.eclipse.org/ Sample_scenario_involving_the_intermediate_meta-model It is rather rudimentary and does not cover the entire set of entities of the meta-model but I believes it captures the essential functionality (i.e. moving between editors that deal with different SOA concerns).

I imagine some things might need further clarification, I will update the page appropriately as questions arise.
best regards,
Adrian.

On Aug 24, 2007, at 5:43 PM, David Bosschaert wrote:

Hi Adrian,

Do you think you can provide the example as discussed well in time to consider it with the proposal. It would greatly help my understanding of the proposed model.

Thanks!

David

Adrian Mos wrote:
Forgot to attach the link referred to in the text...

[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/MinutesAug23


On Aug 24, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Adrian Mos wrote:

Hi Guys,

To follow-up to Adrian Skehill's email, we had an interesting discussion [1] regarding the proposed intermediate model to be used in STP (by editors that want to benefit from facilitated state transfer). We would like to speed up the conceptual phase of this model and start its implementation so I am proposing the date of Friday 31st as the last day to make any changes to it. This would allow us to move forward quickly and not hold back developments on components where this will be used such as the Service Creation component. So please come forward with any suggestions and additions to it until next Friday.

best regards,
Adrian.
---------------
*Adrian Mos*
ObjectWeb Project
SOA Technical Lead

adrian.mos@xxxxxxxx <mailto:adrian.mos@xxxxxxxx>
+33 4 76 61 54 02

*INRIA Rhone-Alpes*
655 avenue de l'Europe - Montbonnot
38 334 Saint Ismier Cedex France


_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev

------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev



----------------------------
IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
Registered Number: 171387
Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland
_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev



--------------------------------------------------------------------- ---

_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev


----------------------------
IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
Registered Number: 171387
Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland
_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev





Back to the top