Hi all,
About the "complete" wording in section 5.5 in the context of "Fix
description of abnormal process completion" issue discussion, I have
crossed checked with section "11.6.2. Link Semantics" (about
<flow> and <link>). The following phrases are used:
"When activity A completes,
the following steps MUST be performed to determine the effect
of the links on other activities: ..."
(I guess that may open up another question for clarification: when an
activity such as <invoke> faults, would it be considered
completed in the context of links evaluation? My guess is no. But, I
cannot find any explicit text so far. Anyhow, that would be another
issue.)
Anyhow, in order to avoid similar guess work from readers, I guess it
may be to say the following in the proposal of Issue 15:
The process ends normally when the main activity of the
process completes without propagating any fault.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Submitter's proposal:
Change paragraph in Section 5.5 FROM:
A business process instance ends either normally or
abnormally. The
process ends normally when the main activity of the process completes.
The process ends abnormally if either:
- a fault reaches the process scope, regardless of whether it
is
handled or not (see section 10.10. Immediately Ending a Process –
Exit), or
- the process instance is explicitly ended by an exit activity
(see section 10.10. Immediately Ending a Process).
TO:
A business process instance ends either normally or abnormally.
The
process ends normally when the main activity of the process completes.
The process ends abnormally if either:
- a process level (explicit or default) fault handler completes
or
- the execution of a process level fault handler itself faults
(the effect of this particular case is similar to an <exit>
activity or
- the process instance is explicitly ended by an exit activity
(see section 10.10. Immediately Ending a Process).
|