[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [bpel4people-editors] B4P and HT BP-16 Revisions Comments
Yes, please do remove it. Thanks From: Trickovic, Ivana
[mailto:ivana.trickovic@sap.com] Regarding the comment on section 2.5 HT: Section 2.5 HT:
Section 2.5 of HT states in
the last sentence of para 1 the following: "A WS-HumanTask Definition MUST
comply with definitions introduced in this section. " Yet... the syntax
presented in section 2.5.1 is informal in nature. If the intention is to ensure
that every concept (expressed as elements and attributes) depicted 2.5.1 MUST
be implemented, we should state so. It seems to me though that this is not
desirable (given the nature of the formulation presented in 2.5.1) and
thus the last sentence of para 1 of 2.5 should be removed or softened. I would
prefer that it be removed given it add little. By "definitions" I meant the XML snippets plus related
specification text (and some elements are defined in other sections, like
htd:task and htd:notification). I agree that syntax included in 2.5.1
is not complete. But I am fine to remove it. Regards, Ivana Ivana Trickovic Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Walldorf, Germany Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats/Chairperson of the SAP Supervisory
Board: Hasso Plattner Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder
sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail
irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine
Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die
empfangene E-Mail. Vielen
Dank. This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed,
or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in
error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it
is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original
transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation. Von: Luc Clement
[mailto:luc.clement@activevos.com] Please find below my comments to B4P BP-16 udpates, and in
passing one issues I’ve identified with HT. By the way, I fixed a typo and language structure issues in the
B4P spec as I was reading – please update from SVN. Luc Luc Clément Active Endpoints, Inc +1.978.793.2162 | luc.clement@activevos.com Updates to HT
Section 2.5 HT:
Section 2.5 of HT states in
the last sentence of para 1 the following: "A WS-HumanTask Definition MUST
comply with definitions introduced in this section. " Yet... the syntax
presented in section 2.5.1 is informal in nature. If the intention is to ensure
that every concept (expressed as elements and attributes) depicted 2.5.1 MUST
be implemented, we should state so. It seems to me though that this is not
desirable (given the nature of the formulation presented in 2.5.1) and
thus the last sentence of para 1 of 2.5 should be removed or softened. I would
prefer that it be removed given it add little. Updates to B4P
Section 3.1.1 Syntax (last para)
Changes were made to the last para of section 3.1.1 where “can” was replaced
with “MAY”. Only process-related human
roles (replaced with) “can” (was) “MAY” be used within the
<b4p:peopleAssignments> element. People are assigned to these roles as
described in section 3.2 (“Assigning People”). I have an issue with this
given the use of “Only”. Unless we expand or make extensible the
process-related human roles, we will need to couple “Only” with “MUST”. Section 4.1.1
Section 4.1.1 was updated but
“MUST not” should be changed to “MUST NOT” in the last sentence of this excerpt bpel:fromParts: This element is
used to assign values to multiple BPEL variables from an incoming multi-part
WSDL message. The element is optional. Its syntax and semantics are introduced
in the WS-BPEL 2.0 specification, section 10.3.1. The <bpel:fromParts>
element and the outputVariable attribute are mutually exclusive. This element MUST not be used in a BPEL4People
Definition if the people activity uses a notification. 4.5.3 Passing Endpoint References for Callbacks
The first sentence was updated replacing “must” with “MUST” as
follows A human task MUST send a
response message back to its calling process However, a Human Task doesn’t
send a response, the “human task Web service” does. We need to change the text
adding “Web service”: A human
task Web service
MUST send a response message back to its calling process Appendix B. Portability and Interoperability Considerations
I'm of the opinion that
appendices should never be normative. The changes made to this appendix (i.e.
"BPEL4People Processor MUST support of" where "BPEL4People
Processor MUST" was introduced) are not warranted and should be reverted
back to the original text. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]