OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 92 - Proposal for vote



Hi DK,

Happy new year! :-)

If we go allowing extensions on <extensions> for (c), we will need to clarify that the ordering of <extensions> matters and make sure we don't run into other chicken-and-egg and catch-22 situations.

Looking forward to a more clarified proposal draft from you.

Regards,
Alex Yiu



Dieter Koenig1 wrote:


Hi Alex, indeed, it was the intention to make declarations mandatory for
all extensions (b). Your point (a) sounds absolutely reasonable to me, this
should be kept consistent. I do not have a clear preference for (c); I
could imagine additional extension-specific declarations within the
<extension> element, however, I do not have a scenario at hand.
Kind Regards
DK



                                                                           
             Alex Yiu                                                      
             <alex.yiu@oracle.                                             
             com>                                                       To 
                                       Dieter Koenig1/Germany/IBM@IBMDE    
             23.12.2004 00:26                                           cc 
                                       wsbpeltc                            
                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>, Alex 
                                       Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>           
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 92 - Proposal  
                                       for vote                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           





Hi, DK

I am agree with your proposal, generally speaking.

There are few things/questions I would to mention/ask:
(a) BPEL's current convention is using "yes" or "no" (bpws:tBoolean)
instead of "true" or "false" (xsd:boolean).

(b) Does this proposal mean ALL BPEL extension points
(element/attribute) MUST be always declared with this syntax? Otherwise,
the BPEL implementation should reject the process.

I presume the answer is yes by reading the implication of the text. It
would be nice to have explicit text on that.

(c) I presume the <extension> related syntax does not have its own
extension points. (e.g. location of extension definition). Again
explicit text on this would be appreciated.


Thanks!


Regards,
Alex Yiu


Dieter Koenig1 wrote:

  
Proposed resolution for Issue 92:
A new subelement of the process root element is used to declare extensions
used in the process and specify whether they must be understood by the
BPEL runtime.

Rationale:
This declaration provides information needed by the process deployer in
order to decide whether a BPEL process containing language extensibility
elements can be executed by the runtime.

Add text to section 6.2. The Structure of a Business Process

  <process ...>
     ...
     <extensions>?
        <extension namespace="anyURI" mustUnderstand="true|false"/>+
     </extensions>
     ...
  </process>

Add text to section 6.3. Language Extensibility

  The "extensions" subelement of the process is used to declare all
  namespaces of BPEL extension attributes/elements and indicate
  whether they carry runtime semantics that must be understood by
  the BPEL runtime.

  If the runtime does not support one or more of the extensions with
  mustUnderstand="true", then the process MUST NOT be deployed.
  Extensions declared with mustUnderstand="false" MAY be ignored by the
  runtime.

Kind Regards
DK


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
.
  

    



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
.



  



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]