Metamodel for GIOP Compression Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

Metamodel for GIOP Compression — All Issues

  • Acronym: ZIOP
  • Issues Count: 83
  • Description: All Issues
Open Closed All
All Issues

Issues Summary

Key Issue Reported Fixed Disposition Status
CORBA34-141 Missing size information for decompress() ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-143 Invalid IDL (2) ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-142 Missing PolicyValue encoding instructions ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-144 Invalid IDL ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-37 ResourceCommitmentManager lacking ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-38 Event mechanism proposal ZIOP 1.0b1 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-40 The spec mentions InvalidConfiguration as exception but there is no idl in this spec ZIOP 1.0b1 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-41 spec should define how the base class of an executor is generated by the framework ZIOP 1.0b1 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-39 typedef CCMObjectSeq ZIOP 1.0b1 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-33 Incorrect statement that implies that connect_consumer returns a cookie ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-34 HomeConfiguration::set_configuration_values should document exception ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA34-36 two not used and document exceptions listed ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.4 Deferred closed
CORBA31-218 ZIOP has to be part of the core CORBA specification ZIOP 1.0 CORBA 3.1.1 Resolved closed
ZIOP-70 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-67 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13.5 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-68 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-64 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-65 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 12 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-69 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-66 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-63 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-62 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-61 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-60 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-57 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-56 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-59 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-54 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-58 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-55 Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-53 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 22 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-52 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 21 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-48 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 17 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-50 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 19 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-46 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-45 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-47 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-49 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 18 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-43 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-44 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-51 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 20 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-42 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-38 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-40 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-37 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-39 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-36 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-33 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-41 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-35 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-34 Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-32 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 19 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-29 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-28 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-27 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-31 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 18 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-30 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 17 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-26 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-25 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 12 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-24 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-23 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-22 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-17 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-19 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-20 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-18 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-21 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-16 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-15 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-14 Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-12 Section 7.3.3.1 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-13 GIOP versions for ZIOP ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-11 replace at 7.4.1 section the following text ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-7 Sections 7.3.1.6 and 7.3.1.7 editorial ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-10 Sections 7.3.1.6 and 7.3.1.7 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-6 Section: 6.5 update content ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-8 Section 7.3.1.7 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Closed; No Change closed
ZIOP-9 Section: 7.3.1: ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-5 Section: Annex B ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-4 Remove Section: 7.5 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-3 Section: 7.4.1 ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-2 Section: 7.4.1 remove sentence ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed
ZIOP-1 ZIOP issue - compliance ZIOP 1.0b1 ZIOP 1.0 Resolved closed

Issues Descriptions

Missing size information for decompress()

  • Legacy Issue Number: 18153
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: grisby.org ( Duncan Grisby)
  • Summary:

    The ZIOP body format contains the original length of the compressed
    data, which is important because it allows the compressor to efficiently
    allocate a buffer to uncompress it. Unfortunately, the
    Compressor::decompress() operation is not given that size, meaning that
    it has to guess how big the uncompressed data will be.

    The original data size should be given to the decompress() operation.
    One way to do that without changing the operation signature would be to
    specify that the inout Buffer target sequence should have its length
    pre-populated to the expected size.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

Invalid IDL (2)

  • Legacy Issue Number: 18151
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: grisby.org ( Duncan Grisby)
  • Summary:

    In the ZIOP 1.0 specification, Annex A has:

    Compressor get_compressor(
    in CompressorId compressor_id,
    in CompressorLevel compression_level)
    raises (UnknownCompressorId);

    CompressorLevel should be CompressionLevel.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

Missing PolicyValue encoding instructions

  • Legacy Issue Number: 18152
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: grisby.org ( Duncan Grisby)
  • Summary:

    Section 17.3.1 of CORBA 3.1 / 3.2 says:

    17.3.1 Structures

    PolicyValue

    This structure contains the value corresponding to a Policy of the
    PolicyType indicated by its ptype. This representation allows the
    compact transmission of QoS policies within IORs and Service
    Contexts. **The format of pvalue for each type is given in the
    specification of that Policy.**

    When the ZIOP 1.0 specification describes the ZIOP policies, it does not
    give the format for pvalue.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

Invalid IDL

  • Legacy Issue Number: 18150
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: grisby.org ( Duncan Grisby)
  • Summary:

    In the ZIOP 1.0 specification, the IDL in Annex A has:

    typedef unsigned short CompressorId { };

    The braces are invalid and should be removed.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

ResourceCommitmentManager lacking

  • Key: CORBA34-37
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15051
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The IDL file 07-02-01 related to CCM is lacking ResourceCommitmentManager

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

Event mechanism proposal

  • Key: CORBA34-38
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14087
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The CCM spec describes the event mechanism default part of CCM. We want to propose to change this event machine to a connector based model as part of the DDS4CCM specification. Then there would be an event connector and the container then is much more light weight and easier to use. People that don't want to use CORBA event machinisms don't pull in all the dependent code

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

The spec mentions InvalidConfiguration as exception but there is no idl in this spec

  • Key: CORBA34-40
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14061
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The spec mentions InvalidConfiguration as exception but there is no idl in this spec that describes this exception and its members

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Wed, 8 Jul 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

spec should define how the base class of an executor is generated by the framework

  • Key: CORBA34-41
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14026
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The LwCCM removes the usage of cidl from CCM, but this looses also the fixed name of the base class of the executor. The spec should define how the base class of an executor is generated by the framework, so that the implementor of the executor can write a portable executor

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

typedef CCMObjectSeq

  • Key: CORBA34-39
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14064
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    In section 10.3.1.2 the typedef CCMObjectSeq is listed, we propose to move it to Section 6.11.1 just after the definition of CCMObject

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Wed, 8 Jul 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

Incorrect statement that implies that connect_consumer returns a cookie

  • Key: CORBA34-33
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15960
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Marcel Smit)
  • Summary:

    In chapter 6.6.8, sub paragraph "connect_consumer" the following statement is given:

    The cookie return value can be used to disconnect from the source.

    I think that this sentence should be removed from the specification since connect_consumer is declared as follows:

    void connect_consumer (
    in FeatureName emitter_name,
    in EventConsumerBase consumer)
    raises (InvalidName, AlreadyConnected,
    InvalidConnection);

    Also, disconnect_consumer doesn't provide a cookie as input parameter.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

HomeConfiguration::set_configuration_values should document exception

  • Key: CORBA34-34
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15164
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    HomeConfiguration::set_configuration_values documentation should mention which exception to thrown when an any/name value pair has a not supported name or when the any can't be extracted

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Wed, 7 Apr 2010 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

two not used and document exceptions listed

  • Key: CORBA34-36
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15052
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The IDL file 07-02-01 related to CCM we have the following exceptions

    exception LastConfiguration {
    };

    exception InvalidReference {
    };

    LastCOnfiguration is not listed at all in 06-04-01 and 06-04-02

    InvalidReference is listed in 06-04-02 in text and diagrams, but not in idl at all

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Deferred — CORBA 3.4
  • Disposition Summary:

    Deferred

    This proposal was generated automatically by request of the Task Force Chair Adam Mitz.

  • Updated: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47 GMT

ZIOP has to be part of the core CORBA specification

  • Legacy Issue Number: 16922
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    The ZIOP specification is an addition to CORBA and should be merged into the main CORBA specification instead of being a stand alone specification

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0 — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 3.1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Move the ZIOP Compression module to CORBA Part 1, section 18
    Move the ZIOP Module to CORBA Part 2, section 12

  • Updated: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 02:25 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16

  • Key: ZIOP-70
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14421
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    All Clauses
    Comment:
    ISO standard documents are described with "shall", "should" and "may".
    Proposed Change
    Define this with "shall", "should" and "may"

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13.5

  • Key: ZIOP-67
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14418
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    8.2.9.1 Code fragment
    Comment:
    It is unclear if this description is normative or informative.
    Proposed change:
    Make distinction between normative and informative.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to clarify that this code fragment is a normative implicit definition

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14

  • Key: ZIOP-68
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14419
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex A
    Comment:
    This annex .defines OMG and related companies's copyright and patent condition. But ISO defines another copyright and patent condition.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex a or make it informative Annex

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to make Annex A an informative Annex

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11

  • Key: ZIOP-64
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14415
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    3.1 Normative Reference
    Comment:
    ZIP is referred to http://www.pkware.com/products/enterprise/white_paper/annnote.txt
    Proposed change:
    Refer to public document. Otherwise ZIP should be removed.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    According to section 6.12.1 (note on Tools), the exact nature of a zip file format is tool
    and platform dependent.
    Thus the single reference in 14.3.3 should be made informal, and the reference [ZIP]
    needs to be removed.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 12

  • Key: ZIOP-65
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14416
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    6.11 Figure 6.2
    Comment:
    The diagram looks like class diagram. However, its syntax is ambiguous. For example, Inheritance arrowhead is solid black triangle. Generally, Inheritance arrowhead is hollow triangle. Besides, there are dashed lines without definition.
    Proposed change:
    Replace the diagram with class diagram.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accommodated by deletion of the Figure, since it is not referred to in the text of the
    document

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15

  • Key: ZIOP-69
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14420
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex B,C
    Comment:
    This is ISO standard, thus it is unnecessary OMG's procedure. Leave them as OMG document only.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex D and C from ISO standard.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to remove Annex B and Annex C from both the ISO Standard and the OMG specification (for
    consistency)

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13

  • Key: ZIOP-66
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14417
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    8.2.6, 8.2.7 Figure 8.1, Figure 8.2
    Comment:
    Syntax for the composition structure diagram is ambiguous. For example, there are gray dashed arrows, however, the legends only show gray solid arrow.
    Proposed change:
    The Fig 8.1 and 8.2 should be represented using the symbol of the legend."

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    The light grey dashed arrows are a fourth type, and are used to represent correspondence
    form the composition example to one of the diagram elements.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10

  • Key: ZIOP-63
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14414
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    3.1 Normative Reference
    Comment:
    There are reference to UML 1.5, MOF 1.4 and XMI.
    Proposed change:
    ISO/IEC 19502:2005 Information technology – Meta Object Facility (MOF)
    ISO/IEC 19501:2005 Information technology - Unified Modeling Language (UML)
    ISO/IEC 19503:2005 Information technology – XML Metadata Interchange (XMI)

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agreed to add the three references

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9

  • Key: ZIOP-62
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14413
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    1 Scope
    Comment:
    There are many references to PIM/PSM. However, those definitions aren't prescribed.
    Proposed change:
    Add reference to MDA prescription. http://www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-1/pdf

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agreed to add refernce to MDA Guide version 1.0.1, and to use it in abbreviation
    definitions for PIM and PSM

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8

  • Key: ZIOP-61
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14412
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    1 Scope
    Comment:
    There is a reference to EJB. This should be referred as normative reference. Furthermore, this refers to private web page (http://java.sun.com/products/ejb/javadocs-1.1-fr).
    Proposed change:
    This reference should move to clause "Normative Reference" and refer to public specification, such as JCP. Furthermore, referred version number should be designated.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree that the reference should be changed to use the JCP url for JSR 950 - EJB 1.1 spec
    final release with errata

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7

  • Key: ZIOP-60
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14411
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction 3rd paragraph
    Comment:
    Since this document is submitted as PAS, it is better to reference ISO/IEC standard in addition to OMG standard.
    Proposed change:
    Add " or this standard (ISO/IEC 19500)" at the end of the first sentence..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to clarify the references

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4

  • Key: ZIOP-57
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14408
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction 3rd paragraph
    Comment:
    1) The second "Part2" seems to be "Part3" instead.
    2) Mixed use of "RM-ODP" and "RM ODP" is confusing.
    Proposed change:
    1) The second "Part2" should be replaced with "Part3".
    2) "RM ODP" should be replaced with "RM-ODP" where applicable..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accept proposed change.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3

  • Key: ZIOP-56
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14407
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Foreword 6th paragraph
    Comment
    1) The year of the standard's issuance need to be corrected.
    2) The names in the second half of two referenced standards start with "-" and need to be removed.
    Proposed change:
    1) The year within the title of RM-ODP Part2 and 3 should be replaced with 1996, like following.
    ITU-T Recommendation X.902(1995)|ISO/IEC 10746-2:1996
    ITU-T Recommendation X.903(1995)|ISO/IEC 10746-3:1996

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    accept proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6

  • Key: ZIOP-59
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14410
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction Last paragraph
    Comment:
    There is no sentence included with respect to annexes of this standard.
    Proposed change:
    Add text that says this standard includes normative and non-normative annexes.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add proposed sentence, however Annex B and C are to be removed, and the Annex A is non
    -normative

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1

  • Key: ZIOP-54
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14405
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Source: Japan NB, Severity te
    Summary:
    Japan will approve this DIS if the te comment jp 8, 11, 14 will be satisfactorily resolved
    Resolution:
    If the te comments JP 8, 11, 14 were accepted in the approved resolutions. See resolutions to OMG Issues

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    All of the comments JP 8, 11, and 14, were resolved in the approved resolutions. See
    resolutions to OMG Issues

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5

  • Key: ZIOP-58
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14409
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction Structure of this standard
    Comment:
    1) This chapter numbers in Structure of this standard are not consistent with actual chapter numbers.
    Proposed change:
    1) Revise the chapter numbers..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accommodate by deletion of “Structure of this Standard” unnumbered subsection. This
    subsection is not required.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 3 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2

  • Key: ZIOP-55
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14406
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Foreword 5th paragraph
    Comment:
    1) The reference to JTC1 is not correct.
    2) The JTC1 subcommittee referenced in this standard is SC32. It seems there is no reference to the reference.
    Proposed change:
    1)"ISO/IEC/TC JTC1" should be replaced with "ISO/IEC JTC1"
    2) Remove reference to SC32.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accept proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 22

  • Key: ZIOP-53
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14404
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    All Clauses
    Comment:
    ISO standard documents are described with "shall", "should" and "may".
    Proposed Change
    Define this with "shall", "should" and "may"

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Specification uses RFC 2119 Terminology

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 21

  • Key: ZIOP-52
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14403
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex C, D
    Comment:
    This is ISO standard, thus it is unnecessary OMG's procedure. Leave them as OMG document only.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex C and D from ISO standard.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to remove Annex C and Annex D from both the ISO Standard and the OMG specification (for
    consistency)

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 17

  • Key: ZIOP-48
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14399
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    7.6.6.3 p.31, p.32
    Comment:
    There are sentences each of which begins with "See …".
    However, the reference pointers are ambiguous for those who are not familiar with the CORBA work.
    Proposed change:
    Replace the references as mentioned above.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to change to proper OMG normative references, and to add to normative
    references clause. OMG is an Authorized Reference Originator
    Replace all the numbered reference text to Firewall spec , showing in the document as
    “(ptc/04-03-01)” with the “[FIREWALL]” reference tag.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 19

  • Key: ZIOP-50
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14401
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction p.xviii (Last paragraph)
    Comment:
    There is no sentence included with respect to annexes of this standard.
    Proposed change:
    Add a sentence which says that this standard includes normative and non-normative annexes.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add proposed sentence

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15

  • Key: ZIOP-46
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14397
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    7.6.4.4 p.29
    Comment:
    The reference pointer of the "Unreliable Multicast" is necessary for the convenience of the readers.
    Proposed change:
    Replace the "Unreliable Multicast" with "in clause 11 of ISO/IEC 19500-2, Unreliable Multicast"..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add reference to clause 11:

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14

  • Key: ZIOP-45
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14396
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    7.6.4.3 p 28
    Comment:
    There is a phrase that "see the CORBA/TC Interworking specification". However, we can't find the place.
    Proposed change:
    Where is this clause ?.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add proper reference to OMG spec

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16

  • Key: ZIOP-47
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14398
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    7.6.6 p.30
    Comment:
    We can't find where the DCE ESIOP is. There is no clause which names DCE ESIOP in ISO/IEC 19500-2.
    What document are CORBA services included in?
    Proposed change:
    Modify the sentence

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to fix by removing deprecated references to DCE ESIOP components

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 18

  • Key: ZIOP-49
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14400
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    3.1 p 2
    Forward p xv
    Comment:
    The year of ITU-T recommendation is different from that of ISO/IEC. The former is 1995, and the latter is 1996.
    Proposed change:
    The correct expressions of the Normative references are as follows:
    ITU-T Recommendation X.902 (1995)| ISO/IEC 10746-2:1996,
    ITU-T Recommendation X.903 (1995)| ISO/IEC 10746-3:1996,

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11

  • Key: ZIOP-43
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14393
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    6.3.4
    Comment:
    When referring to clause(s) in other parts of ISO/IEC 19500 from within ISO/IEC 19500-2, it is clearer to explicitly provide the clause number and part number of the standard, rather stating like "this standard(Part 1).
    Proposed change:
    Replace "in the Interface Repository clause of this standard (Part1)" with "in clause 14 of ISO/IEC 19500-1, Interface Repository clause of CORBA interfaces"..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to refer to clause in 19500-1 as “Part 1 of this Specification” which will hold for both OMG and ISO
    versions of text.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13

  • Key: ZIOP-44
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14395
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    7.6.3 p.27, l.24
    7.6.9 p.33
    Comment:
    We use the term 'clause' when we need to point to the other sections.
    Proposed change:
    Replace "see Section 9.7.3" with "see clause 9.7.3".
    Replace "see Section 9.3" with "see clause 9.3".

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 20

  • Key: ZIOP-51
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14402
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex B
    Comment:
    This annex .defines OMG and related companies's copyright and patent condition. But ISO defines another copyright and patent condition.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex B or make it informative Annex

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to make Annex B an informative Annex

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10

  • Key: ZIOP-42
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14392
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    6.2
    Comment:
    ISO documents are not a book but consist of several parts of documents.
    Proposed change:
    Correct the expression of the phrase "ORB Interface clause of this book(Part1)" , such as "clause 8 of ISO/IEC 19500-1, ORB Interface"..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to change reference to a neutral designation for 19500-1 as “Part 1 of this Specification” which will
    hold for both OMG and ISO versions of text. Use of clause names in other spec references rather than
    clause numbers is more robust to amendments/corrigenda on the references external specification.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6

  • Key: ZIOP-38
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14388
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    4.2
    In 'repository', the sentence tells to 'see' the other terms. However, there is no 'implementation repository' in the definitions list.
    Proposed change:
    Modify the definition of this 'repository' or add the reference to the definition of 'implementation repository', which is mentioned in the clause 6.1.4 of ISO/IEC 19500-1.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree that there is no specialized definition of the word repository as used in this spec

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8

  • Key: ZIOP-40
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14390
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    4.2
    Comment:
    It seems that the definition of a 'request' is circular.
    Proposed change:
    Modify the definition which is not circular. A candidate is " A message issued by a client to cause a service to be performed."..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change of definition text

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5

  • Key: ZIOP-37
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14387
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    4.1
    Comment:
    As the terms 'transparency', 'domain' and 'service' are used in clause 7, and these terms are important for the concept of interoperability, it is preferable to explain the difference or resemblance of usage between the RM-ODP and this CORBA in the document. One way to do this is to define the meaning of the terms. The term 'domain' is defined in clause 4.2. However, other terms are not defined in this document. Where are the definitions of 'transparency' and 'service' ?
    Proposed change:
    If the terms are already defined in the other documents, make a reference to the documents in which the terms are defined. Otherwise, define these terms in this document..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add “transparency” and “service” to the list of terms defined in ODP Reference Model 10746-2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7

  • Key: ZIOP-39
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14389
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    4.2
    Comment:
    There are misspellings in the definitions list.
    Proposed change:
    Correct the word 'wiat' to 'wait' in the definition of the "synchronous request".
    Correct the word 'tow' to 'two' in the definition of the 'interoperability'..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    agree to proposed changes

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4

  • Key: ZIOP-36
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14386
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    4.1 1st line
    Comment:
    The delimiter between X and 902 is not a comma but a dot, and the part number following a document number should be connected by a hyphen.
    Proposed change:
    X,902 should be X.902 and 10746.2 should be 10746-2..

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1

  • Key: ZIOP-33
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14383
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Japan will approve this DIS if the te comment jp 20 will be satisfactorily resolved
    Resolution:
    If the te commentsJP17 were accepted in the approved resolutions. See resolutions to OMG Issues

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    The comment JP20 was resolved in the approved resolutions. See resolutions to OMG
    Issues

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9

  • Key: ZIOP-41
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14391
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Clause 5
    Comment:
    The term ESIOP plays important roles in the document.
    Proposed change:
    ESIOP should be added in the symbols.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add ESIOP to symbols

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3

  • Key: ZIOP-35
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14385
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Clause 2 2nd paragraph
    Comment:
    What does ESIOP mean? There are no descriptions on it.
    Proposed Change:
    Change 'additional ESIOPs' to 'additional Environment-Specific Inter-ORB Protocols(ESIOPs)'

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 2 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2

  • Key: ZIOP-34
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14384
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Comment:
    This document is revision for 19500-2:2003. Therefore, status of the old document is ambiguous.
    Proposed Change
    It is desirable to withdraw the old standard (19500-2:2003) to avoid confusion, if possible.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Clarify upon publication by ISO that This PAS specification is intended to supersede the
    2003 version

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 19

  • Key: ZIOP-32
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14382
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    All Clauses
    Comment:
    ISO standard documents are described with "shall", "should" and "may".
    Proposed Change
    Define this with "shall", "should" and "may"

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Change the title of clause 4 to the following:

    4 Additional information

    Add a new sub section header at beginning of clause 4:

    4.1 Outline of specification contents

    Add new subsection to end of section 4:

    4.2 Keywords for Requirement statements”
    The keywords "must", "must not", "shall", "shall not", "should", "should not", and "may” in this
    specification are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119].“

    Add the following reference in the normative references - section 3.2:
    [RFC2119] IETF RFC2119, “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels”, S. Bradner,
    March 1997. Available from http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 16

  • Key: ZIOP-29
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14379
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Clause 8.5.2 and other places Table 8.1
    Comment:
    1) There are places where the reference to Part 2 is describe like the following:
    "See CORBA, Part 2: ORB Interoperability Architecture clause".
    Proposed Change
    Change the text of referring to other part of the standard throughout the document to:
    "See ISO/IEC 19500-2 Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) specification - Part 2: Interoperability"
    or
    "See ISO/IEC 19500-2 CORBA specification Part 2: Interoperability"
    or
    "See Part 2 of this standard"

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to second proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 15

  • Key: ZIOP-28
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14378
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Clause 7.3 1st paragraph
    Comment:
    1) There is a stand-alone term "1998" in the second line of this paragraph.
    Proposed Change
    1) Change the standard name to "ISO/IEC 14882:2003" or "ISO/IEC 14882:1998" or remove this number from the text.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change to incorporate reference from normative references

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 14

  • Key: ZIOP-27
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14377
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    All Clauses
    Comment:
    1) Both terms, "OMG IDL" and "IDL," are used in the document, and this usage is not consistent.
    Proposed Change
    1) It is suggested to use "OMG IDL" for the first appearance, and with the text explaining that IDL hereafter means OMG IDL, use just IDL for the rest of the document.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 18

  • Key: ZIOP-31
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14381
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex C, D
    Comment:
    This is ISO standard, thus it is unnecessary OMG's procedure. Leave them as OMG document only.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex C and D from ISO standard.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to remove Annex C and Annex D from both the ISO Standard and the OMG specification (for
    consistency)

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 17

  • Key: ZIOP-30
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14380
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Annex B
    Comment:
    This annex .defines OMG and related companies's copyright and patent condition. But ISO defines another copyright and patent condition.
    Proposed Change
    Remove Annex B or make it informative Annex
    Resolution:

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to make Annex B an informative Annex

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 13

  • Key: ZIOP-26
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14376
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    Clause 5
    Comment:
    1) OMA is mentioned but no reference to OMA document is included.
    Proposed Change
    Add the reference to Object Management Architecture Guide

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add reference to OMG OMA Guide

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 12

  • Key: ZIOP-25
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14375
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    Forword 5th paragraph
    Comment:
    1) This document does not have definitions clause.
    Proposed Change
    1) It is suggested to create definitions clause that covers at least major concepts for this standard

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Do not agree to proposed change, since the terms are all defined implicitly by the text in
    the body of the document as they are first introduced.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 11

  • Key: ZIOP-24
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14374
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    Clause 4
    Comment:
    This is a multipart standard, and this clause title is "4 Part1 Document". It is confusing.
    Proposed Change
    Delete unnecessary "Part1".

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 10

  • Key: ZIOP-23
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14373
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    Clause 4
    Comment:
    1) There seems to be duplication between "structure of this standard" section of Introduction and clause 4, and therefore it is better to make text simpler.
    Proposed Change
    1) Structure of this standard section of Introduction and clause 4 should be merged and placed in one place.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accommodated by removal of Structure of Standard subsection from Issue 14369.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 9

  • Key: ZIOP-22
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14372
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Clause 3 Bullet items
    Comment:
    1) The year of the standard's issuance need to be corrected.
    Proposed Change
    1) The years within the title of RM-ODP Part 2 and 3 should be replaced with 1996, like the following.
    o ITU-T Recommendation X.902 (1995) | ISO/IEC 10746-2:1996
    o ITU-T Recommendation X.903 (1995) | ISO/IEC 10746-3:1996

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accept proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 4

  • Key: ZIOP-17
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14367
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Introduction 3rd paragraph
    Comment:
    1) The second "Part 2" seems to be "Part 3" instead.
    2) Mixed use of "RM-ODP" and "RM ODP" is confusing.
    Proposed Change
    1) The second "Part 2" should be replaced with "Part 3."
    2) "RM ODP" should be replaced with "RM-ODP" where applicable.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accept proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 6

  • Key: ZIOP-19
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14369
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Introduction Structure of this standard
    Comment:
    1) The chapter numbers in Structure of this standard are not consistent with actual chapter numbers.
    Proposed Change
    1) Revise the chapter numbers.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accommodate by deletion of “Structure of this Standard” unnumbered subsection. This
    subsection is not required.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 7

  • Key: ZIOP-20
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14370
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Introduction last paragraph
    Comment:
    1) There is no sentence included with respect to annexes of this standard.
    Proposed Change
    1) Add text that says this standard includes normative and non-normative annexes.
    Resolution:

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to add proposed sentence, however Annex B and C are to be removed, and the Annex A is non
    -normative

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 5

  • Key: ZIOP-18
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14368
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Introduction context of CORBA last para
    Comment:
    1) Since this document is submitted as PAS, it is better to reference ISO/IEC standard in addition to OMG standard
    Proposed Change
    1) Add ", or this standard (ISO/IEC 19500)" at the end of the first sentence.
    Resolution:

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    accept proposed changes

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8

  • Key: ZIOP-21
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14371
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Location:
    Clause 2
    Comment:
    1) It would be better to have reference to programming language C++ standard, since it is used in mapping examples.
    2) It would be better to have reference to programming language C standard too.
    Proposed Change
    1) Add the reference to C++, which is ISO/IEC 14882:2003, somewhere in the document.
    See also a comment on Clause 7.3.
    2) Add the reference to C, which is ISO/IEC 9899:1999, somewhere in the document.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Agree to proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 3

  • Key: ZIOP-16
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14366
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    Location:
    Forword 6th paragraph
    Comment:
    1) The year of the standard's issurance need to be corrected.
    2) The names in the second half of four referenced standards start with "-" and need to be removed.
    3) ISO/IEC 19500-3 needs to be added in the list of relevant standards.
    Proposed Change
    1) The years within the title of RM-ODP Part 2 and 3 should be replaced with 1996, like the following.
    o ITU-T Recommendation X.902 (1995) | ISO/IEC 10746-2:1996
    o ITU-T Recommendation X.903 (1995) | ISO/IEC 10746-3:1996
    2) Starting "-"s need to be removed.
    3) Add the following to the list of related standards.
    ISO/IEC 19500-3, Information Technology - Open Distributed Processing - CORBA Specification Part 3: CORBA Components

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Accept proposed change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 2

  • Key: ZIOP-15
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14365
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Source: Japan NB, Severity ed
    Summary:
    Location:
    Forword 5th paragraph
    Comment:
    1) The reference to JTC1 is not correct.
    2) The JTC1 Subcommittee referenced in this standard should be SC7 instead of SC32.
    Proposed Change
    1) "ISO/IEC/TC JTC1" should be replaced with "ISO/IEC JTC1."
    2) "Subcommittee SC 32, Data Management" should be replaced with "Subcommittee SC 7, Software and Systems Engineering."
    Resolution:
    Revised Text:

    Disposition:

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    To be consistent with resolution of similar comment on part 3 (OMG Issue 14406),
    1)”ISO/IEC/TC JTC1” should be replaced with “ISO/IEC JTC1”
    2) Remove reference to SC32.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Japan CORBA Part 1 PAS Ballot Comments - comment 1

  • Key: ZIOP-14
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14364
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
  • Summary:

    Source: Japan NB, Severity te
    Summary:
    Japan will approve this DIS if the TH comments will accept.
    Resolution:
    If The TH comments JP17 were accepted in the approved resolutions. See resolutions to OMG Issues
    Revised Text:

    Disposition: Duplicate of xxxxxx

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 7.3.3.1

  • Key: ZIOP-12
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13801
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Remedy IT ( Johnny Willemsen)
  • Summary:

    the spec defines the following in idl, the reason should be a normal long (not unsigned), some compression libraries do have a negative error number > /** > * Exception thrown when an error occurs during a compress or decompress > * operation. > */ > exception CompressionException >

    { > unsigned long reason; > string description; > }

    ; >

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Change datatype of the reason member of CompressionException from “unsigned long” to “long”

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

GIOP versions for ZIOP

  • Key: ZIOP-13
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13864
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Red Hat ( Robert Kukura)
  • Summary:

    Section 7.4.1 of the beta 1 spec states "GIOP compression can be applied to send or receive GIOP 1.2 messages and includes fragmented messages." There is no other mention of the GIOP versions to which ZIOP can apply. I believe it should apply to subsequent GIOP versions as well, and recommend changing the quoted text to something like "GIOP compression can be applied to send or receive GIOP 1.2 and higher messages and includes fragmented messages."

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Thu, 9 Apr 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Update section as proposed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

replace at 7.4.1 section the following text

  • Key: ZIOP-11
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13658
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    "... is replaced by the CompressionData structure, which contains the
    according Message compressed. The length in the GIOP MessageHeader is
    updated to reflect the new message length, the other fields are
    unchanged.

    // PIDL: ZIOP body in ZIOP Message
    module ZIOP {
    struct CompressionData

    { Compression::CompressorId compressor; unsigned long original_length; Compression::Buffer data; }

    ;
    };
    "

    to:
    "...is replaced by the CompressionData structure, which contains the
    following items encoded in this order:

    · compressor: contains a identifier which indicates the compressor
    algorithm used in current ZIOP message.
    · original_length: contains a unsigned long value which represents the
    GIOP body length of the current GIOP message without apply any
    compression.
    · data: is a octet sequence which contains the compressed Message."

    About the following sentence, I'm sure if is correct:

    "The length in the GIOP MessageHeader is updated to reflect the new
    message length, the other fields are unchanged."

    "The length in the GIOP Header is updated to reflect the new message
    length, the other fields are unchanged as it was described below."

    And the following IDL code could be moved before this paragraph:

    // PIDL: ZIOP body in ZIOP Message
    module ZIOP {
    struct CompressionData

    { Compression::CompressorId compressor; unsigned long original_length; Compression::Buffer data; }

    ;
    };

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Wed, 4 Mar 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Update the text as proposed in section 7.4.1

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Sections 7.3.1.6 and 7.3.1.7 editorial

  • Key: ZIOP-7
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13472
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    The words "..this compresso during.." must be changed by "..this
    compressor during.."

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fix typo as recommended

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Sections 7.3.1.6 and 7.3.1.7

  • Key: ZIOP-10
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13475
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Red Hat ( Robert Kukura)
  • Summary:

    Could be improved adding some words:

    • "..compressor during compression *of input data* "
    • "..compressor during decompression *of output data* "
  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    The beta 1 spec now explicitly refers to the source/target argument of the
    compress operation. Adding input/output doesn't clarify things to my idea,
    there is no input/output in the IDL. To clarify these sections I propose to
    change "side" into "argument" in section 7.3.1.6 and 7.3.1.7

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section: 6.5 update content

  • Key: ZIOP-6
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13471
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    The content of this paragraph could be updated as follows:
    "This specification describes the ZIOP pluggable protocol implemented in
    TIDorbJ and TIDorbC++ by Telefonica I+D and TAO by Remedy IT."

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add TIDorbJ as proposed to section 6.5

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 7.3.1.7

  • Key: ZIOP-8
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13473
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    The words "this compressor during compression" must be changed by "this
    compressor during decompression

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    The compressed_bytes/decompressed_bytes are added to calculate the ratio.
    The ratio should be calculated based on the original bytes and the
    compressed bytes of the compress operation. It doesn't make sense to use the
    bytes of the decompression, there is then no relationship to the compress.
    Also the decompress is unrelated to the compression level, only the compress
    is related to the compression level. The number decompressed_bytes is
    really the source bytes of the compress operation.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section: 7.3.1:

  • Key: ZIOP-9
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13474
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Red Hat ( Robert Kukura)
  • Summary:

    compression_ratio must be changed from unsigned long to float? I agree,
    more precision.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Change datatype of Compression::CompressionRatio typedef from long to float. Also the calculation of the ratio is changed to compressed_length/original_length

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section: Annex B

  • Key: ZIOP-5
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13470
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    "TBD by OMG" must be replaced with the Policy ID numbers provided by
    Andrew Watson

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Official Policy Ids have been requested to the OMG and have been assigned.
    ZIOP::COMPRESSION_ENABLING_POLICY_ID = 64
    ZIOP::COMPRESSOR_ID_LEVEL_LIST_POLICY_ID = 65
    ZIOP::COMPRESSION_LOW_VALUE_POLICY_ID = 66
    ZIOP::COMPRESSION_MIN_RATIO_POLICY_ID = 67
    Revised Text:

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Remove Section: 7.5

  • Key: ZIOP-4
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13469
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    This section was in response to OMG Request for Proposal. Only argues
    why compression can not be considered at Security Layer, and it doesn't
    introduces or describes any other technical issue about ZIOP. Maybe at
    this stage could be removed also.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Removed section 7.5

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section: 7.4.1

  • Key: ZIOP-3
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13468
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    Change "ZIPOP" to ZIOP at this sentence: " is not required for ZIPOP at all."

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Because of issue 13467 this sentence has been removed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section: 7.4.1 remove sentence

  • Key: ZIOP-2
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13467
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Telefonica I+D ( Alvaro Vega)
  • Summary:

    Maybe the following sentence could be removed:
    "The ServiceContext list can't be used to transfer that a GIOP
    message contains compressed data because a GIOP fragment doesn't contain
    a ServiceContext list."
    because I think that in this stage we only need describe what is ZIOP,
    instead of what is not and why not.

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove text as proposed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

ZIOP issue - compliance

  • Key: ZIOP-1
  • Legacy Issue Number: 13344
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Real-Time Innovations ( Dave Stringer)
  • Summary:

    Specification: GIOP Compression (ZIOP)

    Section: 7.4.1 and 2

    Description:

    Section 7.4.1 includes “To allow interoperability between a ZIOP and a non ZIOP party the client ORB that supports ZIOP will send only ZIOP messages to servers which have been declared to accept ZIOP messages.”

    Is the decision to declare, one for the server implementer or for the ORB implementer?

    Section 2 “Conformance”, offers “two optional conformance” points and then goes on to assert that at least one of these must be supported. This isn’t the usual meaning of “optional”, perhaps “alternate” would be a better word.

    The second alternate would appear not to provide interoperable compression. E.g. interoperability with an ORB conforming to the first alternative.

    If indeed, it is the intention that ZIOP, in some form, is mandatory (not optional) then how are existing implementations viewed? If they implement GIOP 1.2 but do not implement ZIOP, are they compliant or not?

  • Reported: ZIOP 1.0b1 — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — ZIOP 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Change 7.4.1 to just mention client/server
    Change 2 to be more closed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT