Issue 1863:  Page 77, section 4.3.5 - change of data type (printing-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Revision
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: 6. Page 77, section 4.3.5, change the data type of the "interactor"
 attribute from "name" to "string".
 

Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
August 26, 1998: received issue
Discussion: 
 received issue
End of Annotations:=====
Return-Path: <pmurray@redwood.rt.cs.boeing.com>
X-Sender: pmurray@redwood.rt.cs.boeing.com
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 20:42:15 -0700
To: Juergen Boldt <juergen@omg.org>
From: Paul Murray <paul.murray@boeing.com>
Subject: OMG Print Facility issues
Cc: paul.murray@boeing.com, revankar@wrc.xerox.com

Juergen:

	Please assign issue numbers to the following for the Printing
Facility
RTF. These issues apply to document # 98-01-05.

					- Paul Murray

6. Page 77, section 4.3.5, change the data type of the "interactor"
attribute from 'name' to 'string'.

From: blakeb@gemstone.com (Blake Biesecker)
Subject: Issues 1853 & 1863m (WrongTransaction and WRONG_TRANSACTION)
To: ots-rtf@omg.org
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:23:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-UIDL: ^]]d9n>(!!Xd&!!dp~!!

Since both these issues deal with WrongTransaction
vs. WRONG_TRANSACTION problem, I think we should 
combine the discussions on them since any resolution
should address both issues. 

It looks like the only reference to WRONG_TRANSACTION
in the OTS spec (ptc/99-10-07) is controlled by the
Messaging specificiation. All references made in
orbos/97-12-01 or formal/98-07-09 have been removed. 
Does anybody know what caused the OTS's references 
to WRONG_TRANSACTION to be removed in ptc/99-10-07?

Blake Biesecker
GemStone Systems
Tel: (503) 533-3434
email: blakeb@gemstone.com



Issue 1853: Is WRONGTRANSACTION a SystemException or a UserException
(ots-rtf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: is WRONGTRANSACTION a SystemException or a
UserException? I haven"t checked the latest CORBA draft, but some ORB
vendors (e.g.,
Sun) are implementing it as a UserException, whereas others 
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
August 24, 1998: received issue

Discussion: received issue

Issue 1963: WrongTransaction vs WRONG_TRANSACTION (ots-rtf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: The latest OTS spec (formal/98-07-09) has this
exception as WRONG_TRANSACTION, while the CORBA 2.2 and draft CORBA
2.3
documents have WrongTransaction. Which one is right, and is it a
system exception, as implied by the OTS, or a user exception as
implied by CORBA 2.2? 
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
September 16, 1998: received issue
August 19, 1999: moved from core to ots rtf

Discussion: