Wayne Beaton wrote on 10/03/2018 07:56 PM:
Depends on the
requirements of the JSP specification. If the JSP
specification doesn't depend on some optional elements of
the Servlet specification, the full JSP CI wouldn't need to
implement those optional elements of the Servlet
specification. In general, a JSP CI wouldn't be
implementing the Servlet spec at all, but would require a
Servlet CI to run on.
This is what I was hoping for. There are no inferred
requirements for prerequisite specification implementations.
Can I safely assume that the same is true for Profiles?
No.
This is back to the discussion we had previously about whether the
spec is a dependency or is included. Servlet is a dependency of
JSP. Servlet is included in the Web Profile.
What does it mean to
"add" a Compatible Implementation to a Final Specification?
We have had previous discussions regarding a requirement
to keep track of Compatible Implementations and the ability
to add new ones to the list as they certify. I've come to
regard this as part of the metadata of a Final
Specification.
On a related note, it seems like a good idea to me to
have some sort of standard metadata format to describe the
various pieces of a Final Specification. But that's an
implementation detail.
The lifetime of this information is different than the lifetime of a
specification, so I would keep them separate.
As I've said previously,
the specification document should not refer to any
implementations.
+1
The Project Review should
include information about Compatible Implementations. Once
the review is complete, there's no need to update that
information, but we might want to separately maintain a list
of Compatible Implementations for a given spec.
"might want" suggests that it's up to the Specification
Committee to decide what to do. My understanding is that the
notion of Compatible Implementations takes the place of the
notion of a single reference implementation. My expectation
then, is that that means that we have a requirement to
provide pointers to Compatible Implementations as part of a
Final Specification.
Yes, but that's different than whether we want to maintain a
separate list of Compatible Implementations that evolves over time
as more implementations are produced and become compatible.
Release Review records persist, but they don't feel like
the right means to provide this.
To provide the evolving list of Compatible Implementations? I
agree.
|
