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: Issue - 220 - Is the elephant allowed to throw Standard Faults in more cases than specified?


This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list with a status of "received". The status will be changed to "open" if the TC accepts it as identifying a bug in the spec or decides it should be accepted specially. Otherwise it will be closed without further consideration (but will be marked as "Revisitable")

The issues list is posted as a Technical Committee document to the OASIS WSBPEL TC pages on a regular basis. The current edition, as a TC document, is the most recent version of the document entitled in the "Issues" folder of the WSBPEL TC document list - the next posting as a TC document will include this issue. The list editor's working copy, which will normally include an issue when it is announced, is available at this constant URL.

Issue - 220 - Is the elephant allowed to throw Standard Faults in more cases than specified?

Status: received
Date added: 23 Jun 2005
Categories: Fault handling
Date submitted: 23 June 2005
Submitter: Danny van der Rijn
Description:

The general question is in the subject line. However, let me illustrate with a specific.

bpel:conflictingReceive:

from 14.5:

"If during the execution of a business process instance, two or more receive activities for the same partner link, portType, operation and correlation set(s) are in fact simultaneously enabled, then the standard fault bpws:conflictingReceive MUST be thrown by a compliant (elephant). "

OK, got that. Now let's imagine that the 2 simultaneous receive's are for the same portType, operation and correlation set(s), but DIFFERENT partnerLinks. Further imagine that when actually deployed, the 2 different partnerLinks are mapped to the same endpoint. As far as I can tell, this is exactly the case where bpws:conflictingReceive would make sense. However, one could argue that the programmer would be surprised by receiving such a fault, since he never used the same partnerLink twice.

Another example of this would be if one of the partnerLink's partnerRole's was assigned to the other one. So they are fundamentally the same, and even in a way detectable to the process in a portable way, without an elephant. Would bpel:conflictingReceive be appropriate here?

So the fundamental question I have is: are the bpel:standardFault's available to be thrown BY THE ELEPHANT in ANY case other than what is specifically called out? There is no language that I can find that says an elephant MUST NOT throw standard faults except as specified, nor can I find language that says that it MAY or SHOULD.

Of course, the programmer can throw them whenever he chooses, but that's not what I'm asking about.
Changes: 23 Jun 2005 - new issue


To comment on this issue (including whether it should be accepted), please follow-up to this announcement on the wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org list (replying to this message should automatically send your message to that list), or ensure the subject line as you send it starts "Issue - 220 - [anything]" or is a reply to such a message. If you want to formally propose a resolution to an open issue, please start the subject line "Issue - 220 - Proposed resolution", without any Re: or similar.

To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document (but the address for new issue submission is the sender of this announcement).


Choreology Anti virus scan completed


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