[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-tx] Issue 32 - Requirement for MixedOutcome
I think there are numerous sections affected by this proposed change (at least three not referenced in Mark's lineage below). However, I think that this detailed information is not required. There is a big issue here, which can sensibly be discussed by anyone who has read and assimilated the specs, and the issue of the line numbers it affects is an editorial question which flows from the resolution of this issue. Ditto for Coordinator Completion (which is even more pervasive in the spec). Alastair Mark Little wrote: > Section 3, lines 151-168. > > Mark. > > > Ram Jeyaraman wrote: >> Mark, >> >> Could you please provide the PDF line numbers in the referred document >> that are relevant to this issue. Thanks. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ram Jeyaraman [mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com] Sent: >> Friday, March 17, 2006 2:55 PM >> To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: [ws-tx] Issue 32 - Requirement for MixedOutcome >> >> This is identified as WS-TX issue 32. >> Please ensure follow-ups have a subject line starting "Issue 32 -" >> (after any Re:, [ws-tx] etc.) >> >> =================================== >> >> Issue name: Requirement for MixedOutcome >> >> Issue type: spec >> >> Owner: Mark Little (mark.little@jboss.com) >> >> Reference documents: >> >> WS-BA specification: >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17203/ws >> tx-wsba-1.1-spec-cd-01.pdf >> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17044/h >> ttp://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17129/wst >> x-wsat-1.1-spec-wd-04.pdf> >> Description: >> >> The MixedOutcome is not tested for in the interoperability scenarios >> (AtomicOutcome is). This either needs to be fixed, with some >> scenarios added, or we should remove the capability. I haven't seen >> any good arguments for why we should have this protocol within the >> BusinessActivity specification. If there is a requirement, then it seems >> >> more appropriate for a separate model (i.e., specification) to host >> this. >> >> Proposed resolution: >> >> Remove MixedOutcome >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]