#2539 CR12: Add CLASS/INSTANCE child to RETURNVALUE

[Dave Blaschke]

The Java CIM Client does not appear to implement a small change from DMTF CRCIMXML00012:

2. Change clause 5.2.6.13 as follows:

5.2.6.13 RETURNVALUE

The RETURNVALUE element specifies the (scalar) value returned from an extrinsic method call.
<!ELEMENT RETURNVALUE (VALUE|VALUE.REFERENCE|CLASS|INSTANCE)?>
<!ATTLIST RETURNVALUE
%EmbeddedObject;
%ParamType; #IMPLIED>

The child element of the RETURNVALUE element represents the returned value. The absence of a child element indicates that the returned value is NULL.

The PARAMTYPE attribute (defined by the ParamType entity) if provided identifies the CIM type of the returned value.

If the direct child element of the RETURNVALUE element is a VALUE element, CIM-XML producers shall provide the PARAMTYPE attribute with one of the values defined in Table 2. The requirement to provide the PARAMTYPE attribute was added in version 2.4.0 of this specification because it supports strongly typed representations of values in CIM-XML consumers and can be used to improve performance. CIM-XML producers that support older versions of this specification may not provide the PARAMTYPE attribute for these direct child elements. In that case, CIM-XML consumers need to have knowledge about the CIM type in order to interpret the value of VALUE child elements correctly (for example, the uint8 value 3 and the string value "3" are both represented as <VALUE>3</VALUE>). If CIM-XML consumers do not have knowledge about the CIM type, they should assume as a default that the value is string-typed.

If the direct child element of the RETURNVALUE element is a VALUE.REFERENCE, CLASS, or INSTANCE element, CIM-XML producers should provide the PARAMTYPE attribute. If provided, it shall have the value defined in Table 2. Because there is only one possible PARAMTYPE value for each of these child elements, CIM-XML consumers can infer the CIM type of the return value from the name of the direct child element, if the PARAMTYPE attribute is not provided.

[Dave Blaschke]

Another version of CRCIMXML00012 is out for review which does NOT include CLASS and INSTANCE under RETURNVALUE, so this bug will have to wait until the CR is approved

[Dave Blaschke]

Lowering priority one notch below normal, this bug is dependent on DMTF CIM-XML changes

[Dave Blaschke]

Classic ID #3569428

[Dave Blaschke]

DSP0201 2.4.0a-rc1 was published yesterday. It contains the following:

1759 5.3.6.13 RETURNVALUE

1760 The RETURNVALUE element specifies the (scalar) value returned from an extrinsic method call.

1761   <!ELEMENT RETURNVALUE (VALUE | VALUE.REFERENCE)?>
1762   <!ATTLIST RETURNVALUE
1763      %EmbeddedObject;
1764      %ParamType; #IMPLIED>

So currently, this bug ticket looks like it will be cancelled.

[Dave Blaschke]

CLASS/INSTANCE elements not needed in RETURNVALUE element per DMTF: "it turns out the correct approach for representing embedded classes and instances in a method return value is to use a VALUE element with a string type, where the string is the usual escaped representation of the embedded object"