Re: [wsbpel] Issue 68 - Proposal for vote

[jim@parasoft.com (Jim Clune)]

Satish -

Is the faultType value to be interpreted as a WSDL message type or an XML
Schema type?

Jim Clune
Parasoft Corporation          email: jim.clune@parasoft.com
101 E. Huntington Ave.      voice: (626) 256-3680
Monrovia, CA.  91016           fax  : (626) 256-6884
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>
To: <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 5:01 PM
Subject: [wsbpel] Issue 68 - Proposal for vote


I propose that we change the syntax of faultHandlers to the following

<faultHandlers>?
    <!-- there must be at least one fault handler or default -->
    <catch faultName="qname"? faultVariable="ncname"?
faultType="qname"?>*
      activity
    </catch>
    <catchAll>?
      activity
    </catchAll>
</faultHandlers>

And in addition I propose that we add the following sentences
immediately following the syntax.

Note that the faultName, faultVariable and faultType attributes are all
optional.  However, the faultVariable and faultType declarations go
together, i.e., they must either both be present or both absent.  This
is to ensure that the type of the faultVariable is well specified even
when the faultName is omitted.  Moreover, the faultName and
faultVariable attributes cannot both be absent.

Satish


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.