Danny,
Are you asking that the clarification that was in the parenthesis "(ie,
not within
another nested scope)" be added, to make things clear?
Regards,
Prasad
Danny van der Rijn wrote:
Just
going through (parts of) the spec again, and I found that the
wording that ended up in the spec for 162 (13.3, 3rd para from the end):
"All scopes and activities directly nested in a
scope MUST be uniquely named."
Is not as clear as in the issues list. (Note that I can't find this
text in any email, only in the issues list).
"The names of all activities directly nested (ie, not within
another nested scope) within a scope will be unique."
May I ask the editors to update the spec with the issues list
language? It seems much clearer to me in a way that isn't obvious
otherwise.
Dieter Koenig1 wrote:
Issue 162 - Unique Activity Names for Compensate
Proposal: Add text to section 13.3.3 "Invoking a Compensation Handler" to
clarify that activity names used in a compensate activity must be unique
within the scope.
Rationale: Currently, there is no constraint on activity names, i.e. the
activity name (standard attribute) does not have to be unique. As a result,
a compensate activity may become ambigous:
scope
compensationHandler
compensate "A" <-- don't know which one
scope name="A" <-- first enclosed scope
scope name="A" <-- second enclosed scope
Kind Regards
DK
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.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
|