[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-bpel] Issue 14: we forgot intents
Danny van der Rijn wrote: > Agreed. I had to drop off the call during the discussion, but from the > minutes, it seems we also ignored (intentionally or unintentionally) my > thoughts about Schematron. Danny, On the last call, in fact, I called out your schematron issue. Unfortunately, I think, you had dropped off the call. Since there was no objection, the motion got approved. -Anish -- > Is there any interest in the committee for > using Schematron to give a little more rigor to where items can be put, > and in what combination? > > Anish Karmarkar wrote: >> >> We resolved issue 14 on today's call, but right after the call ended I >> realized that we did not define an extension for specifying intends in >> the BPEL process. In a previous call we had informally agreed that >> specifying intends in the process made sense. Issue 14 is not just about >> services and references but about everything that can be specified in >> the process. >> >> -Anish >> -- >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in >> OASIS >> at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]