Re: [wsbpel] Issue 6.2 - An appropriate extension

[Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>]

Hi, Yaron,

The reason that I want to see this proposal passed ...
NOT because I want to solve the whole hunger problem and whole nine yard 
of early completion.
NOT because I want to standardize every single bell and whistle related 
to early-completion.

It is because I want to clarify how 
<scope>+<compensationHandler>+<terminationHandler> works together with 
early completion. I want to flush out the issues, similar to whether we 
allow a partial termination of a scope (first discussed by Ivana, Satish 
and me) and create consensus among this TC.

<scope> semantics is one of the most fundamental part of the BPEL spec. 
If we have fundamental diverged interpretation of how <scope> works 
today, there is no way for us to to standardize an extension later.

I hope you would understand.


Thanks!


Regards,
Alex Yiu



Yaron Y. Goland wrote:

> The mechanisms in this proposal are experimental. By which I mean that 
> they are not mechanisms that have been widely used in existing 
> business process languages and with which the business process 
> community has experience. I would respectfully suggest that it would 
> be more appropriate for this proposal to be made into an extension to 
> BPEL rather than as a core part of the normative BPEL specification. 
> Let the community first experiment with these features, gain 
> experience, gain confidence and then we can look to standardize them. 
> Please keep in mind, that standardizing these features at a future 
> date does not require a full revision of the BPEL standard. The 
> features can be standardized as an extension.
>
>         Yaron
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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