RE: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro

["Edwin Khodabakchian" <edwink@collaxa.com>]

+1. Could we please apply the same logic to exception and compensation
shortcuts? Shortcuts are evil! :-)

Edwin 

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:25 PM
> To: Yuzo Fujishima; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
> Yuzo,
> 
> If we expected people to directly author processes at this 
> level something like this would be attractive, but do you 
> really expect that?
> 
> Satish
> 
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yuzo Fujishima [mailto:fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:15 PM
> To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would like to propose what may be called "implicit sequence".
> 
> Implicit sequence "macro":
> If multiple activities are placed in a process definition 
> where only one activity is allowed per se, assume there is an 
> implicit sequence activity that contains the activities.
> 
> Example:
> 
> Regard
>   <scope>
>    <receive/>
>    <invoke/>
>    <reply/>
>   </scope>
> as
>   <scope>
>    <sequence>     <!-- implicit sequence -->
>     <receive/>
>     <invoke/>
>     <reply/>
>    </sequence>
>   </scope>
> 
> Pros:
> * More concise description.
> 
> Cons:
> * ?
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Yuzo Fujishima
> NEC Corporation
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
>