Re: [wsbpel] New issue: Partner Relationships

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

> yendluri: Hi Monica,
>
> There is no context for "ROLES" in WHETHER THESE ROLES ARE RELATED, as 
> the text preceding it does not speak to the role aspect (there is no 
> reference to role in there). It seems the text in background 
> description you provided captures it pretty elegantly.

mm1: Agreed.

> How about changing it as follows?
>
> The partnerLink declarations specify the relationships that a
>   WS-BPEL process will employ in its behavior. In order to utilize
>   operations via a partnerLink, the binding and communication data,
>   including endpoint references (EPR), for the partnerLink must be
>   available (see also *Link*).  The relevant information about a
>   partnerLink can be set as part of business process deployment. This
>   is outside the scope of the WS-BPEL specification. WS-BPEL DOES NOT
>   SPECIFY WHETHER THESE ROLES ARE RELATED, BY CALLBACK OR OTHERWISE
>   (SUCH AS THE SEMANTIC RELEVANCE OF THEIR PAIRING).
>    In addition any semantic relationship or pairing of partnerLinks, 
> portTypes and EPRs is outside of the specification.
>
> This does not mention "callback" but, the significance of it is not 
> clear to me. BPEL processes do make call-back <invoke>s on an 
> operation in portType on a prtnerLink, as we have shown in the spec 
> (and in some examples).

mm1: Part of this text was changed during the review process.  I 
understand your point and don't have much preference either way about 
that part of the verbiage.
How about:

    The partnerLink declarations specify the relationships that a
    WS-BPEL process will employ in its behavior. In order to utilize
    operations via a partnerLink, the binding and communication data,
    including endpoint references (EPR), for the partnerLink must be
    available (see also *Link*).  The relevant information about a
    partnerLink can be set as part of business process deployment. This
    is outside the scope of the WS-BPEL specification. WS-BPEL DOES NOT
    SPECIFY WHETHER ROLES, PARTNER LINKS, PORTTYPES AND EPRS ARE RELATED
    (SUCH AS THE SEMANTIC RELEVANCE OF THEIR PAIRING).


>> ========
>> new issue: Partner Relationships
>>
>> Background: During the May 2006 F2F there was discussion surrounding 
>> partner links, EPR, etc.  A question was raised and later clarified 
>> that resulted in this editorial issue and proposed resolution to 
>> further specify that the semantic relationship or pairing of 
>> portTypes, EPR and partner links is outside of the specification.
>>
>> reference: Section 6.2
>> Change from:
>>
>>    The partnerLink declarations specify the relationships that a
>>    WS-BPEL process will employ in its behavior. In order to utilize
>>    operations via a partnerLink, the binding and communication data,
>>    including endpoint references (EPR), for the partnerLink must be
>>    available (see also **Link**). The     relevant information about a
>>    partnerLink can be set as part of business process deployment. This
>>    is outside the scope of the WS-BPEL specification.
>>
>> Change to (changes in UPPER CASE):
>>
>>    The partnerLink declarations specify the relationships that a
>>    WS-BPEL process will employ in its behavior. In order to utilize
>>    operations via a partnerLink, the binding and communication data,
>>    including endpoint references (EPR), for the partnerLink must be
>>    available (see also *Link*).  The relevant information about a
>>    partnerLink can be set as part of business process deployment. This
>>    is outside the scope of the WS-BPEL specification. WS-BPEL DOES NOT
>>    SPECIFY WHETHER THESE ROLES ARE RELATED, BY CALLBACK OR OTHERWISE
>>    (SUCH AS THE SEMANTIC RELEVANCE OF THEIR PAIRING).
>