Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 99 - New issueTriggering activities for abstractprocesses

[Danny van der Rijn <dannyv@tibco.com>]

the problem description makes perfect sense to me, but i don't understand
the proposal.  can you elaborate further?

----- Original Message ----- 

Description: The current version (BPEL4WS v1.1, May 2003) specifies that
each process (either executable or abstract) must contain at least one
"start activity" (start activity is either a receive activity or a pick
activity that receives a message and is annotated with the createInstance
attribute set to "yes" to indicate that the occurrence of that activity
causes a new instance of the process to be created).
This restriction makes less sense for BPEL abstract processes. Because of
this restriction, the abstract process of the party that initiates a message
exchange must be extended and a start activity must be introduced (also
additional WSDL elements, such as port types, messages, must be defined as
well as partner link type). But how the initiating process is started is an
implementation detail and does not have to be included in the BPEL abstract
process since it is not part of the "business protocol".

Submitter's proposal: Allow the invoke activity to be used as the start
activity for abstract processes.
Changes: 3 Mar 2004 - new issue



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

To comment on this issue, please follow-up to this announcement on the
wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org list (replying to this message should
automatically send your message to that list), or ensure the subject line as
you send it starts "Issue - 99 - [anything]" or is a reply to such a
message.

To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document (but the address for
new issue submission is the sender of this announcement).

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.