[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] New issue: Partner Relationships
> 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). >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]