RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 111 - Proposal For Vote

[Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>]

Hi Chris,

This is the text of the resolution we approved for 111.1 (
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200503/msg00085.html):

Alternative resolution to issue 111.1

Approach:
---------
Maintain the current BPEL 'standard' extensibility model by which all BPEL
elements are by considered extensible with both attribute and elements
(outside the BPEL namespace), except where explicitly noted otherwise; in
particular, in cases where additional (or 'non-standard') extensibility is
explicitly architected, a non-extensible wrapper element shall be
introduced to contain the architected extensions.

It seems to me that my proposal for 111 is the only one fully consistent
with 111.1. As for your hypothetical use case, I am really afraid of our
tendency to over-engineer based on hypothetical use cases. We don't even
have a solid example of an extensible activity, nor a real activity
extension element, so it is totally unclear what is the relevance of that
use case.

Paco



                                                                                                                                         
                      "Chris Keller"                                                                                                     
                      <chris.keller@active-end        To:       Francisco Curbera/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "'wsbpeltc'"                         
                      points.com>                      <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>                                                     
                                                      cc:                                                                                
                      07/22/2005 10:27 AM             Subject:  RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 111 - Proposal For Vote                             
                      Please respond to                                                                                                  
                      chris.keller                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                         




Hi Paco,

I still have the one issue I mentioned in the last meeting.  This proposal
closes off the ability to add element based generic activity extensions.

For example imagine an extension (which was actually proposed at one time
called assert).  In my extension assert may be applied to any activity to
assert a precondition before executing the activity.  Given the schema that
you sent the following would be illegal.

<extensionActivityWrapper>
   <ns1:assert>...expression...</ns1:assert>
   <ns2:call process="ns:name"/>
</extensionActivityWrapper>


- Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Francisco Curbera [mailto:curbera@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 9:51 AM
To: wsbpeltc
Subject: [wsbpel] Issue - 111 - Proposal For Vote


111 - Extension Activities

Proposal: Add an extensionActivityWrapper element to support extension
activities

Introduce Section 11.9

New activities can be introduced for use in BPEL by using the
extensionActivityWrapper element. An extensionActivityWrapper element MAY
contain BPEL's activity standard-attributes and standard-elements;
additionally, it MUST contain a single extensibility element from a
namespace different form the BPEL namespace, which provides the information
required to execute the extensible activity.

If the extension element contained within the extensionActivityWrapper
element is not recognized by the BPEL processor and is not subject to a
mustUnderstand="true" requirement from an extension declaration then the
new activity MUST be treated as if it were an empty activity.

<extensionActivityWrapper standard-attributes>
       standard-elements
    <???? >
     ...
    </????>
</extensionActivityWrapper>

Schema:

Add to activity group:

<element name="extensionActivityWrapper"
type="bpws:textensionActivityWrapper"/>

Add the following definition:

<complexType name="textensionActivityWrapper">
      <complexContent>
          <sequence>
                <element name="targets" type="bpws:tTargets"
minOccurs="0"/>
                <element name="sources" type="bpws:tSources"
minOccurs="0"/>
                <any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
            </sequence>
            <attribute name="name" type="NCName"/>
            <attribute name="suppressJoinFailure" type="bpws:tBoolean"
use="optional"/>
            <anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
      </complexContent>
 </complexType>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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






---------------------------------------------------------------------
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