Re: [wsbpel] Profiles Re: [wsbpel] Issue 99 - Updated proposal forvote

["Yaron Y. Goland" <ygoland@bea.com>]

In reviewing the resolution of issue 82 
<http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200504/msg00090.html> as 
well as the meeting minutes in which issue 82 was discussed 
<http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/download.php/12360/Minutes%20April%2013.htm> 
I can find no language which states that we will accept without change 
the abstract profile included in BPEL 1.1.

What I do remember is us agreeing that there should be a minimum of one 
profile in WS-BPEL 2.0 and that profile should be *based* on the 
observable abstract behavior functionality discussed in BPEL4WS 1.1. But 
at no time do I remember us agreeing to a blanket grandfathering of 
BPEL4WS 1.1's existing behavior.

If my memory is failing me and such an agreement has in fact been 
entered into, voted upon and accepted by the group I apologize and ask 
to be pointed to the relevant text.

	Thanks,

		Yaron



Rania Khalaf wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> For 82, the idea we had agreed upon was to grandfather the existing
> AP1.1 by making it into a profile. A big part of that agreement was
> because we already have most of the work done and there is a continuity
> argument we are going on. Clearly, we'll have to do the completions
> section from scratch since this concept is new (and update the wording,
> etc).
> 
> Any requested changes or bugs can be addressed and voted on for that
> particular profile as specific changes to the what was in  the
> capabilities of AP1.1 - with the new lingo of what that means being
> "what's the subset of opacity from the base"  and "what's the subset of
> exec BPEL that it allows". Changes we've seen folks talking about lately
> include whether or not to have 'exit', whether or not we want to include
> the new version of getVariableData in addition to getPropertyValue, etc
> ... .  Some have had more concensus on that others.
> 
> We're definitely not going back to the drawing board with AP1.1, but we
> should have a proper way to propose and vote on concrete, manageable,
> stepwise changes.  Otherwise, we will never finish and it will be
> against the spirit of our negotiations and agreements on 82.
> 
> I would please ask people to wait a little while till I post the summary
> of the AP1.1 concepts in the new lingo under the placeholder issue for
> it, and we can take it from there. I've been travelling like mad lately
> and have just settled back into a period where I don't see a flight in
> my near future ;) so this won't be long in coming.
> 
> Regards,
> Rania
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>