[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-bpel] Issue 14: we forgot intents
Anish, declaring multiple extension namespaces is definitely allowed in BPEL (exactly in the way you showed it below). (1) I apparently missed a point during the last call, however. Until now, I was hoping that we have a clear distinction between elements/attributes used in SCA artifacts (.../opencsa/sca/200712) and elements/attributes extending the WS-BPEL 2.0 standard (.../opencsa/sca-bpel/200801). Because of this, I would prefer adding an sca-bpel:requires attribute definition to the latter. Even though it has almost the same semantics (see also (2) below), it is an attribute on a bpel:partnerLink and not on an sca:service/sca:reference and should therefore be defined in the dedicated BPEL extension namespace. (2) For a partner link pointing to a partner link type with two roles, does the new attribute on a bpel:partnerLink apply to the myRole or the partnerRole side of the partner link type, or both? If we have a potential ambiguity here then an alternative could be adding the new attribute to the role element inside the partner link type. Kind Regards DK Dieter König Mail: dieterkoenig@de.ibm.com IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Senior Technical Staff Member Tel (office): (+49) 7031-16-3426 Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter Architect, Business Process Fax (office): (+49) 7031-16-4890 Geschäftsführung: Herbert Kircher Choreographer Member, Technical Expert Council Tel (home office): (+49) 7032-201464 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen Schönaicher Strasse 220, 71032 Registergericht: Amtsgericht Böblingen, Germany Stuttgart, HRB 243294 |------------> | From: | |------------> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com> | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Michael Rowley <mrowley@bea.com> | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Cc: | |------------> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |OASIS BPEL <sca-bpel@lists.oasis-open.org> | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |16.04.2008 02:58 | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Re: [sca-bpel] Issue 14: we forgot intents | >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Looking at the syntax of <extensions>, it seems like the following would be allowed: <extensions> <extension namespace="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-bpel/200801" mustUnderstand="yes" /> <extension namespace="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/200712" mustUnderstand="yes" /> </extensions> -Anish -- Michael Rowley wrote: > > > I've made some proposed changes to the spec as part of this resolution. > You can find them here > < http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bpel/download.php/27912/sca-bpel-1.1-spec-cd-01-rev2.doc >. > > > > I ran into a problem with directly reusing the XSD definition of > @requires from the assembly specification. The problem was that our > extension to WS-BPEL is defined as follows: > > > > <extensions> > > <extension > > namespace="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-bpel/200801 " > > mustUnderstand="yes" /> > > </extensions> > > > > And, unfortunately, WS-BPEL does not allow multiple namespaces to be > associated with a single extension. > > > > In the version that I have uploaded, I’ve just created a > sca-bpel:requires attribute and reused SCA’s definition of > sca:listOfQNames. I’ve also added a normative reference to the policy > spec for its exact syntax and semantics. > > > > Michael > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:41 AM > To: Michael Rowley > Cc: OASIS BPEL > Subject: Re: [sca-bpel] Issue 14: we forgot intents > > > > I like it. No reason to create a new attribute (it is a global attr decl > > in SCA schema). This means WSDL and BPEL would use the same extension > > attribute with the same semantics. > > > > -Anish > > -- > > > > Michael Rowley wrote: > >> Perhaps we should have a single @sca:requires attribute, which goes on > >> partnerLinks, whose contents are the same as the contents of a service > >> or reference @requires attribute. The semantic of the attribute would > >> be that it is translated directly into a @requires attribute on the > >> service or reference that is generated for the partnerLink. > >> > >> How does that sound? > >> > >> Michael > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 12:06 PM > >> To: OASIS BPEL > >> Subject: [sca-bpel] Issue 14: we forgot intents > >> > >> 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 > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]