Re: [wsbpel] Issue 82 - propsal for a vote (last, no change log)

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

>Monica,
> I think you are objecting to the wording as being misleading rather than the concept.  The concept is simply this:
> 
>(1)  A profile IS NOT allowed to add anything to the syntactic universe defined by the common base, to ensure that it is in fact the common base.
> 
>(2)  A profile IS allowed to restrict usage thus disallowing syntactically valid abstract processes, i.e., processes which belong to the common base.
> 
>The subset terminology is meant to reflect these ideas.  
> 
>Do you agree with the conceptual description?  If you do, how would you express it?  Perhaps just spelling this out in the right place?
> 
>
mm1: I think that is the jist of it. I think that Rania's suggested 
revision takes care of this. Thanks.

>________________________________
>
>From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:Monica.Martin@Sun.COM]
>Sent: Wed 4/13/2005 9:01 AM
>To: Rania Khalaf
>Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 82 - propsal for a vote (last, no change log)
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>Khalaf: Hi,
>>This is a textual clarification that says the same thing as the old
>>text did when it said
>>that a profile can reduce the kinds of things that can be opaque and
>>can also choose to do things like for example not allow links, or not
>>allow event handlers.
>>The idea of subsetting the syntax is  a cleaner way to define this
>>that was proposed in response to a request for clarifying the above idea.
>>    
>>
>
>mm2: I understand and agree that a profile may subset. I however, do not
>agree it is a subset of the common base. Otherwise, we have no common base.
>
>  
>
>>>>Khalaf: ....................A profile MUST not violate the common
>>>>base. Specifically, a profile defines
>>>>(i) A URI that identifies the profile and is used as the value of
>>>>the abstractProcessProfile attribute by all abstract processes that
>>>>belong to the class defined by the profile.
>>>>(ii) A class of abstract processes that is a subset of the common
>>>>base, i.e., the set of syntactically valid abstract processes that
>>>>belong to the profile. Note that the subset does not have to be
>>>>proper, i.e., it may include the entire common base. Examples
>>>>include profiles that disallow control links or certain types of
>>>>opaque tokens. Note further that the subset must be consistent with
>>>>respect to the use of the omission-shortcut. Specifically, if a
>>>>profile limits the use of opaque tokens in the class of abstract
>>>>processes it covers, then it can only permit those omissions that
>>>>correspond to permitted usage of opaque tokens. For instance, if a
>>>>profile does not allow attributes to be opaque, then abstract
>>>>processes belonging to that profile cannot omit attributes using the
>>>>omission-shortcut.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>mm1: We have not discussed that a profile would revise / subset the
>>>common base.
>>>      
>>>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>  
>