RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 123 - Matching <reply> with <receive>

["Eckenfels. Bernd" <B.Eckenfels@seeburger.de>]

it is not a requirement to have the same csets, it forbids to have the wrong (init=no) ones (i.e. reply has CSets which the receive had not). In that case the reply is  not compatible with the receive

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bernd Eckenfels
Chief Architect
--
SEEBURGER AG - Edisonstr.1 , D-75015 Bretten, Germany
Fax: +49 (0)7252 96-2400 - Phone: +49 (0)7252 96-1256
mailto:b.eckenfels@seeburger.de - http://www.seeburger.de


-----Original Message-----
From: Yaron Y. Goland [mailto:ygoland@bea.com]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 1:49 AM
To: Yuzo Fujishima
Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 123 - Matching <reply> with <receive>


The proposal says:

     A reply and a receive are said to be compatible with each other if (A)
    the same partner link, port type, and operation are specified for both
    and (B) the correlation sets specified for reply with initiate attribute
    no are all specified for the receive regardless of the value of the
    initiate attribute there.

Why is B required? Even if one isn't using a message exchange it's 
always possible to match up on partnerLink and operation without having 
to match on correlation sets.