Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 11 - Let's get a proposal nailed down

[David RR Webber - XML ebusiness <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Monica,

This is key.  Especially as - having realized <assign> has turned into
the ability to morph content structures - is this even desirable?!?

And how maintainable is this across structure varients?

In the generalized usage case - between business partners - you
want the information exchange to happen to a prescribed format - such
as UBL, EDIFACT, RosettaNet PIP, HIPAA et al.  So having your 
BP engine able to tinker with the transaction format may cause all 
kinds of audit control managers to reach for their large guns!

Harping on the CAM soap-box - CAM does provide you the means to
know upfront - exactly what formats will occur - by whom and why - 
across the wire.   I understand why <assign> needs to update field
data - but I suspect we need to pause and REALLY know what we
are doing - before we introduce other capabilities - especially
in regard to transactions.

Thanks, DW.
==========================================================
Message text written by Monica Martin
>mm2: Chris, we have a template so if you and Danny can solidify your 
thoughts, I would be willing to assist as needed to get the use case 
formalized.
(Within my limit of understanding of some of the syntactic nuances you 
both have been discussing).  Let's think of a relevant scenario first.
Thanks.
<