RE: [wsbpel] Issue 120 - Clarification on Resolution

["Alexandre Alves" <aalves@bea.com>]

Dieter,

The context of that phrase is for the examples we have in that section:
' The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost
every messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke).'

The examples do not use 'pick/onMesage/onEvent', so I think we are fine
on not mentioning them.

Agree?

Thanks,


-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Yiu [mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 12:08 PM
To: Dieter Koenig1
Cc: Alexandre Alves; Charlton Barreto; Danny van der Rijn;
wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org; Alex Yiu
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 120 - Clarification on Resolution



Since that statement is not exactly normative ... how about adding "for 
example,"

every messaging activity (for example, receive, reply, and invoke)

Then, we do not need to repeat every single message construct.

Thanks!


Regards,
Alex Yiu


Dieter Koenig1 wrote:

>Just a minor: "every messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke)"
would
>also need to include pick/onMessage and eventHandlers/onEvent.
>Kind Regards
>DK
>
>
>
>

>             "Alexandre Alves"

>             <aalves@bea.com>

>
To 
>             16.02.2006 01:45          <alex.yiu@oracle.com>, "Danny
van   
>                                       der Rijn" <dannyv@tibco.com>,

>                                       "Charlton Barreto"

>                                       <cbarreto@adobe.com>,

>                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>

>
cc 
>

>
Subject 
>                                       RE: [wsbpel] Issue 120 -

>                                       Clarification on Resolution

>

>

>

>

>

>

>
>
>
>
>After further off-line discussions, the new suggested spec text is:
>
>In Section 9.2:
>
>- from:
>
>The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost
every
>messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because
WS-BPEL
>does not assume the use of any sophisticated conversational transport
>protocols for messaging. In cases where such protocols are used, the
>explicit use of correlation in WS-BPEL can be reduced to those
activities
>that establish the conversational connections
>
>- to:
>
>The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost
every
>messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because the
>WS-BPEL specification does not assume the use of any sophisticated
>conversational transport protocols for messaging. In cases where such
>protocols are used, the explicit use of correlation in WS-BPEL can be
>reduced to those activities that establish the conversational
connections.
>These protocol mechanisms MAY be used implicitly with or without any
>explicit use of correlation.
>
>Thanks!
>
>
>From: Alexandre Alves
>Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 9:59 AM
>To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org; Danny van der Rijn
>Subject: [wsbpel] Issue 120 - Clarification on Resolution
>
>In Section 9.2:
>
>- from:
>
>The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost
every
>messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because
WS-BPEL
>does not assume the use of any sophisticated conversational transport
>protocols for messaging. In cases where such protocols are used, the
>explicit use of correlation in WS-BPEL can be reduced to those
activities
>that establish the conversational connections
>
>- to:
>
>
>The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost
every
>messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because
WS-BPEL
>does not assume the use of any sophisticated conversational transport
>protocols for messaging. In cases where such protocols are used, an
>implicit implementation-specific correlation mechanism MAY be used.
>
>
>  
>