Issue 3556: Life cycle of an AnalysisInstance (biomolecular-ftf) Source: Japan Biological Informatics Consortium (Mr. Martin Senger, martin.senger@gmail.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Life cycle of an AnalysisInstance. These objects have the back pointer to their AnalysisServices. However, I can imagine the situation where clients have AnalysisInstance objects stored somewhere and using them to retrieve results of previously (even long ago) started and finished analysis. This normal situation can become interesting if the server does not provide that analysis any more. I feel that it would be still reasonable to provide access to the old stored results. Suggestions: But to allow it, our spec should mention this possibility - and allows to have this back poiter empty. So the client will have access to their data but with limited support from the server (for example the client cannot get metadata because the corresponding analysis is simply dead). Or we could say that the back poiner cannot remain empty but can return NO_OBJ... or whatever sytem exception (in situations as described above)>. Or, we'd have to change the readonly attribute to a method so that we can add the exception. Resolution: Accepted. Document the use of a CORBA system exception. Revised Text: Add an Exception row to the box describing service in section 2.2.10. Raise CORBA::OBJECT_NOT_EXIST if the AnalysisService is no longer available. Actions taken: April 11, 2000: received issue May 24, 2001: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 19:53:32 +0100 (GMT) From: Martin Senger To: Juergen Boldt cc: biomolecular-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: several possible "issues" In-Reply-To: <38F2C7F5.518CB9A3@netgenics.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-UIDL: 2(#"!EOS!!7j5e9_~"e9 Juergen, Here are some issues we are discussing in the FTF. I think that they are ready to be issued as issues :-). Could you please do it? Most of them are just changes in the spec document and I do not know if they should be separated or sent together. I am refering to the lifesci/99-12-01. Life cycle of an AnalysisInstance. These objects have the back pointer to their AnalysisServices. However, I can imagine the situation where clients have AnalysisInstance objects stored somewhere and using them to retrieve results of previously (even long ago) started and finished analysis. This normal situation can become interesting if the server does not provide that analysis any more. I feel that it would be still reasonable to provide access to the old stored results. Suggestions: But to allow it, our spec should mention this possibility - and allows to have this back poiter empty. So the client will have access to their data but with limited support from the server (for example the client cannot get metadata because the corresponding analysis is simply dead). Or we could say that the back poiner cannot remain empty but can return NO_OBJ... or whatever sytem exception (in situations as described above)>. Or, we'd have to change the readonly attribute to a method so that we can add the exception. Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:21:40 -0700 From: Scott Markel Organization: NetGenics, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BSA FTF Subject: [OMG-BSA] proposed resolutions for some issues Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: W9!e9QLE!!'Okd9>SPe9 In accordance with the consensus at last week's FTF meeting, here are the proposed resolutions for the issues that were considered straightforward. Note that as some multi-issue issues are split apart, some of those may also fall into this category. I'm not reproducing the entire text of the individual issues. You can find that at http://cgi.omg.org/issues/biomolecular-ftf.html. Issues can be reported online at http://www.omg.org/technology/issuesform.htm. This message is *not* a vote. I just want to make sure these particular issues are as straightforward as some of us thought last week. Please let me know if you disagree. Actually it would be nice to know if you agree, too. :) If there's been no response by early next week (Philip is out until then), I'll send out a message kicking off a vote. If there are responses, hopefully we'll get the resolutions resolved and still vote on these issues next week. Scott Issue 3556: Life cycle of an AnalysisInstance Resolution: Add an Exception row to the box describing service in section 2.2.10. Raise CORBA::OBJECT_NOT_EXIST if the AnalysisService is no longer available.