Issue 117 - Proposal for Vote

[Yuzo Fujishima <fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>]

Hi,

Because there were only positive comments for the original proposal,
I would like to propose to vote on it.

 > *Submitter's proposal:* Allow defining links with the same name. For a
 > referencing activity, the inner-most link for the activity hides all other links
 > with the same name. (In the above example, activity I1 is the target of link
 > F2.L1, not F1.L1.)

Yuzo Fujishima
NEC Corporation

ws-bpel issues list editor wrote:

> This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list. The issues list is posted as 
> a Technical Committee document to the OASIS WSBPEL TC pages 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel> on a regular basis. The 
> current edition, as a TC document, is the most recent document with the title ** 
> in the "Issues" folder of the WSBPEL TC document list 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/documents.php> - the next 
> posting will include this issue. The list editor's working copy, which will 
> normally include an issue when it is announced, is available at this constant 
> URL <http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html>.
> 
> 
>     Issue - 117 - Link Name Scoping
> 
> *Status:* open
> *Categories:* State management
> *Date added:* 14 Apr 2004
> *Submitter:* Yuzo Fujishima <mailto:fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>
> *Date submitted:* 14 April 2004
> *Champion:* Yuzo Fujishima [fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com]
> *Document:* BPEL 1.1 Specification
> *Description:* When a flow activity is nested within another flow activity, two 
> links with the same name can be defined, one for each flow. The current 
> specification is unclear about whether such definition is legal, and if legal, 
> how link names are scoped.
> 
> Discussion:
> 
> Suppose we have the following process:
> 
> <flow name="F1">
>   <links>
>     <link name="L1"/> <!-- L1 is defined here and ... -->
>   </links>
>   <sequence name="S1">
>     <flow name="F2">
>       <links>
>         <link name="L1"/> <!-- ... here -->
>       </links>
>       <sequence name="S2">
>           <invoke name="I1" ...>
>             <target linkName="L1"/> <!-- Which L1? -->
>           </invoke>
>           ...
> 
> Note that link L1 is defined at two places.
> Q1: Is this definition legal?
> Q2: If legal, is I1 target of L1 of F2 (F2.L1) or L1 of F1 (F1.L1)?
> *Submitter's proposal:* Allow defining links with the same name. For a 
> referencing activity, the inner-most link for the activity hides all other links 
> with the same name. (In the above example, activity I1 is the target of link 
> F2.L1, not F1.L1.)
> *Links:* Yuzo Fujishima, 13 Apr 2004 
> <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200404/msg00021.html>     rkhalaf, 
> 13 Apr 2004 <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200404/msg00023.html> 
>     Yaron Y. Goland, 13 Apr 2004 
> <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200404/msg00030.html>
> *Changes:* 14 Apr 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 - 117 - [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.
>