On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, jfcm wrote:
Sorry, to say it again, but you are talking here of a protocol
between X and Y without having modelized X and Y. The callout
protocol, X and Y modelization must be an harmonious interative
process.
jfc,
Please understand that such comments are not constructive
enough to cause any action. There are working group documents that
describe architecture and protocol requirements. Obviously, people who
wrote them and who are now working on the protocol think that they
have "modelized X and Y"! Sure, some models can be improved and some
scope questions need to be answered, but those improvements and
answers are unlikely to affect the subject of this thread IMO.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with the published documents,
but please be constructive! Tell the group what exactly is wrong with
the current models. Suggest specific improvements if possible. It is
the only way we all can understand and address your concerns. "You
have not modelized" is not something others can address given the fact
that some models do exist in the working group documents.
modelize what you are talking about.
Please see architecture and protocol requirements documents. They are
my models.
But what are you both really calling a "processor"?
Whatever receives raw application messages and talks to the callout
server for the purpose of adapting those application messages. That's
enough detail/modelization for the subject of this thread, I think.
This thread does not really care what the processor or dispatcher is
beyond what is currently defined in the architecture and requirements
documents. Why do you ask?
The callout server may modify the message.
what do you call the message?
Whatever that application protocol calls a message. I should have said
"may modify the application message", to be precise.
If it received only a part of the stream, do you call message the
chunk it receives or a set of copied and non copied data chuncks.
[Copied] flag applies to an application data chunk. Copying commitment,
if any, applies to several chunks (possibly the entire application
message).
Dispatchers rules may say that (A+B ) calls for B only to be
modified into B', and that (A+B' ) calls for A to be modified too,
or in conjunction with B'.
Sorry, I do not follow. I do not understand what "(A+B) calls for B"
means.
Copying seems hazardous anyway because if several services are
called in conditional succession, how will a service know the nature
of what is in the buffer. Are they original or already modified
data.
Original data may have a [copied] flag. Modified data must not have a
[copied] flag unless the dispatcher made a copy of the modified data
before calling the next service. Apart from that distinction,
coordination between individual OPES services is outside of this
thread scope, I guess.
Alex.