Hi all,
The amended proposal was passed in today's conf call.
An amendment is made for part (a). The changes is highlighted by "**".
-----------------------------
The Abstract Process namespace URI does not apply to
**<partnerLinkType>**, <property>, <propertyAlias>
and <service-ref> elements. That means, these elements are not
declared in the Abstract Process namespace and MUST be always
identified with **their own namespace URIs**, even when used in the
context of Abstract Processes.
Similarly, any XPath function defined by this specification are always
identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even when they are
used in an expression in an Abstract Process.
-----------------------------
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi all,
Assuming the TC are OK with the choice of having 4 separating
namespaces: abstract, executable, "property+properytAlias",
"service-ref" [Dieter indicated that is his preference in issue 294.1].
Here is the slightly revised proposal. (highlighted in blue)
======================================
[a]
At the end of Section: "13.1.1. URI",
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process syntax is
denoted under the following namespace:
urn:oasis:names:tc:wsbpel:2.0:process:abstract
--------------------------------------
add:
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process namespace URI does not apply to <property>,
<propertyAlias> and <service-ref> elements. These elements are declared in their own namespaces
[TODO: add xref to "2. Notational Conventions"], instead of Abstract or
Executable Process namespaces. They
MUST be always identified with their correseponding, even
when used in the context of Abstract Processes.
Any XPath function defined by this
specification are always
identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even when they are
used in an expression in an Abstract Process.
--------------------------------------
[b]
Also formally incorporated the text suggested in action item #74:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=1434
In the paragraph:
--------------------------
The following XPath extension functions are defined by WS-BPEL and MUST
be supported by a WS-BPEL implementation:
· getVariableProperty, described below
· doXslTransform, described in section 8.4. Assignment
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL namespace.
--------------------------
Change the last sentence to:
--------------------------
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL Executable Process
namespace.
--------------------------
Then, add clarification text on XPath extension function for other NS,
as
follows:
--------------------------
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other
namespaces available. If a process definition contains XPath functions
of other namespaces, they are treated like WS-BPEL extensions declared
with mustUnderstand="yes" (see Section 14. Extension Declarations).
Therefore, a WS-BPEL Processor that does not support one or more of
these XPath extension functions MUST reject the process definition.
This requirement MUST be statically enforced.
Also, the XPath extension functions, as always required by XPath
semantics,
MUST not perform any side-effect operations visible to the WS-BPEL
process.
--------------------------
======================================
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi, all,
Here is the revised proposal for vote for issue 294.2: Clarification
namespace usage in Abstract and Executable Process:
(after factoring in suggestion from Danny and Simon)
======================================
[a]
At the end of Section: "13.1.1. URI",
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process syntax is
denoted under the following namespace:
urn:oasis:names:tc:wsbpel:2.0:process:abstract
--------------------------------------
add:
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process namespace URI does not apply to <property>,
<propertyAlias> and <service-ref> elements. That means,
these elements are not declared in the Abstract Process namespace and
MUST be always identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even
when used in the context of Abstract Processes.
Similarly, any XPath function defined by this specification are always
identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even when they are
used in an expression in an Abstract Process.
--------------------------------------
[b]
Also formally incorporated the text suggested in action item #74:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=1434
In the paragraph:
--------------------------
The following XPath extension functions are defined by WS-BPEL and MUST
be supported by a WS-BPEL implementation:
· getVariableProperty, described below
· doXslTransform, described in section 8.4. Assignment
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL namespace.
--------------------------
Change the last sentence to:
--------------------------
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL Executable Process
namespace.
--------------------------
Then, add clarification text on XPath extension function for other NS,
as
follows:
--------------------------
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other
namespaces available. If a process definition contains XPath functions
of other namespaces, they are treated like WS-BPEL extensions declared
with mustUnderstand="yes" (see Section 14. Extension Declarations).
Therefore, a WS-BPEL Processor that does not support one or more of
these XPath extension functions MUST reject the process definition.
This requirement MUST be statically enforced.
Also, the XPath extension functions, as always required by XPath
semantics,
MUST not perform any side-effect operations visible to the WS-BPEL
process.
--------------------------
======================================
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
|