OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 295



Hi all,

Sorry for following this issue a bit late.
Yes, it would be a different issue to add additional element/type 
related info at <fromPart>.
Also, given this lifecycle of the spec, I don't think it worths to open 
a new issue fort that.

Thanks!

Regards,
Alex Yiu


Thomas Schulze wrote:

>Hi Mark,
>
>I agree with you. It would be for readability only and differs from the
>variable attribute. Not sure if it is worth to open an issue for that...
>
>Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>       Thomas Schulze
>
>
>
>                                                                           
>             "Mark Ford"                                                   
>             <mark.ford@active                                             
>             -endpoints.com>                                            To 
>                                       Thomas Schulze/Germany/IBM@IBMDE    
>             07.06.2006 16:08                                           cc 
>                                       "'Alex Yiu'" <alex.yiu@oracle.com>, 
>                                       "'Danny van der Rijn'"              
>                                       <dannyv@tibco.com>, "'wsbpeltc'"    
>                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>       
>                                                                   Subject 
>                                       RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 295            
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>
>
>
>
>You should open this as a separate issue.
>
>The additional attribute is not required but it may improve readability.
>It's similar to the portType attribute on the message exchange activities
>(invoke, receive ...etc). These new attributes would be optional and if one
>is present it MUST match the declared type of the message part. Obviously
>the attributes are mutually exclusive. This would be another static
>analysis
>check.
>
>That said, this is slightly different than the variable attribute for the
>onEvent. In the case of the onEvent we need the additional attribute in
>order to determine if the variable will be an element or a message. In the
>case of the <fromPart>, we've already received the data into an ATWMV
>(Anonymous Temporary WSDL Message Variable) so the part name is all that is
>required to access the data.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas Schulze [mailto:ThomasSchulze@de.ibm.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 3:10 AM
>To: Mark Ford
>Cc: 'Alex Yiu'; 'Danny van der Rijn'; 'wsbpeltc'
>Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 295
>
>Hi Mark,
>
>thanks for resending ;-)
>
>Regarding "As for the question about defining a variable's type in
><fromPart>'s implicit var declaration, I believe we state that the type
>comes from the message part's type declaration."
>Comparing this with the variable declaration on onEvent when using the
>variable attribute instead of <fromPart>, it would be more consistent to
>have the declared variable type not only in the WSDL message part, but in
>the BPEL process itself.
>
>Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>       Thomas Schulze
>
>
>
>
>             "Mark Ford"
>             <mark.ford@active
>             -endpoints.com>                                            To
>                                       "'wsbpeltc'"
>             07.06.2006 00:37          <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
>                                                                        cc
>                                       "'Alex Yiu'" <alex.yiu@oracle.com>,
>                                       Thomas Schulze/Germany/IBM@IBMDE,
>                                       "'Danny van der Rijn'"
>                                       <dannyv@tibco.com>
>                                                                   Subject
>                                       [wsbpel] Issue - 295
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Resending Thomas's email with the issue # in the subject.
>
>I believe that Thomas has identified all of the issues where this applies:
>- <variable name="...">
>- <forEach counterName="...">
>- <onEvent variable="...">
>- <onEvent>'s <fromPart toVariable="...">
>- <catch faultVariable="...">
>
>
>Would we want to update all of pseudo schema examples to use the new type
>name or leave them as NCName?
>
>
>As for the question about defining a variable's type in <fromPart>'s
>implicit var declaration, I believe we state that the type comes from the
>message part's type declaration.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas Schulze [mailto:ThomasSchulze@de.ibm.com]
>Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 4:11 AM
>To: Mark Ford
>Cc: 'Alex Yiu'; 'wsbpeltc'
>Subject: RE: [wsbpel] RE: NCName restriction to avoid "."
>
>+1 to the idea catching this by the schema validation.
>
>Isn't this constrain only needed for those places where new variables are
>declared? That should be <variable name="...">, <forEach
>counterName="...">,
><onEvent variable="..."> and the <fromPart toVariable="..."> version of
><onEvent> and <catch faultVariable="...">.
>
>All other cases are variable references. Not sure if we really need it
>there.
>
>Btw. doesn't the <fromPart toVariable="..."> variant of <onEvent> require
>the variable's type defined (attributes messageType, element and type)?
>
>Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>       Thomas Schulze
>
>
>
>
>             "Mark Ford"
>             <mark.ford@active
>             -endpoints.com>                                            To
>                                       "'Alex Yiu'" <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
>             05.06.2006 01:35                                           cc
>                                       "'wsbpeltc'"
>                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
>                                                                   Subject
>                                       RE: [wsbpel] RE: NCName restriction
>                                       to avoid "."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yes. Basically, anywhere that we're referring to a variable the type should
>be "BPELVariableName" instead of "NCName". Of course I'll leave the actual
>selection of the name to the schema powers at be but you get the idea.
>
>The only downside to this is that we need to add a little more text to the
>current spec to define what this type is since it will appear in our pseudo
>schema examples. This may impact readability a little but it goes a long
>way
>in making the restriction explicit. If I were reading the spec for the
>first
>time and I saw "BPELVariableName" for the data type I would naturally
>assume
>that there was some restriction in play and then go and find the definition
>of this type. As it is now, NCName appears in multiple places without any
>kind of qualifier to indicate that it's a restricted NCName.
>
>From: Alex Yiu [mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com]
>Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 7:26 PM
>To: Mark Ford
>Cc: 'wsbpeltc'; Alex Yiu
>Subject: Re: [wsbpel] RE: NCName restriction to avoid "."
>
>
>Mark,
>
>Do we want to apply the same restriction to variable attribute of <from>
>and
><to> spec also?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Regards,
>Alex Yiu
>
>
>Mark Ford wrote:
>      +1 from me ;)
>
>      This would also apply to the implicit variables created by a
>      <fromPart> nested within an onEvent.
>
>      I'll open an issue on this.
>
>      From: Alex Yiu [mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com]
>      Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 5:38 PM
>      To: wsbpeltc
>      Cc: Mark Ford; Alex Yiu
>      Subject: NCName restriction to avoid "." (was: [Fwd: BPEL Schema
>      question])
>
>
>      Hi guys,
>
>      Mark has the following suggestion to use the data type other than
>      NCName to restrict the "." usage in variable names.
>
>      I am OK with it.
>      Thought?
>
>      Thanks!
>
>      Regards,
>      Alex Yiu
>
>
>      -------- Original Message --------
>
>     Subject: BPEL Schema question
>
>        Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 13:27:35 -0400
>
>        From: Mark Ford <mark.ford@active-endpoints.com>
>
>          To: 'Alex Yiu' <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Hi Alex,
>
>
>      What do you think about changing the data type of a variable's name
>      to be a restriction of NCName to disallow the "." as described in
>      Section 8.1? The dot is a legal value for NCNames but disallowed for
>      Xpath binding purposes of message variables.
>
>
>      This also applies to the name of the counter attribute on a
>      <forEach>.
>
>
>      I'd prefer to catch these types of errors with the XSD as opposed to
>      having to write code to catch them during static analysis.
>
>
>      Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]