RE: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate schemata for abstract and executable processes

["John Evdemon" <jevdemon@microsoft.com>]

Seems like a good idea - it would also enable us to set a precedent
regarding BPEL extensions - the core could be isolated as a "base"
schema with separate abstract and executable schemas.  Additional
extensions (whatever they might be) could be instantiated as separate
schema files.  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:34 PM
> To: Danny van der Rijn; John Evdemon; wsbpel@lists.oasis-
> open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate schemata for
> abstract and executable processes
> 
> I agree that we should do this -- anyone disagree?
> 
> Satish
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny van der Rijn [mailto:dannyv@tibco.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:01 PM
> To: John Evdemon; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate schemata for
> abstract and
> executable processes
> 
> yes.  that was the issue i raised.  and then yaron pointed out
> that once
> separated, the schemata should be published as well.
> 
> danny
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Evdemon" <jevdemon@microsoft.com>
> To: "Danny van der Rijn" <dannyv@tibco.com>;
> <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 5:21 PM
> Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate schemata for
> abstract and
> executable processes
> 
> 
> On Friday, December 12, 2003 4:32 PM, Danny van der Rijn
> wrote:
> >
> > while the current schemas were published, the current
> document still
> has the
> > schemas, i believe.  and the current schemas don't provide
> separate
> schemas
> > for abstract and executable processes.
> >
> > if i'm showing the effects of jet lag, please let  me know..
> >
> I think the schemas should remain in the spec (appendices)
> _and_ be made
> available as separate files (as they are now).
> 
> The current spec doesn't use separate schemas for abstract and
> executable processes - isn't this one of the reasons you
> raised issue #
> 24?
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
> roster of
> the
> OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr
> oup.php.
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
> roster of
> the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr
> oup.php.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
> roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php
> .
>