I'd stick with your original. As I pointed out in my email which
crossed yours, the meaning of successful completion is already twisted,
with no effort on your part ;-)
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi all,
FYI ... another paragraph in section 11.6.2 describes the relationship
between "complete" of an activity and "fault" ... But that is specific
to <scope>.
The
associated source activity MUST complete
before the
<transitionCondition>
of
a link is evaluated. In the case of source activities that are
themselves <scope>'s,
successful completion is not required. That is, a <scope>
may suffer an internal fault and yet complete (unsuccessfully) if there
is a
corresponding fault handler associated with the <scope>
and that fault handler completes without throwing a fault.
After a bit more thinking, I don't want to accidentially twist the
meaning of "complete". Hence, I want to amend my own last suggestion by
add "i.e." or "that is".
The process ends normally when the main activity of the
process completes (i.e. without propagating any fault).
Thanks again!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Alex Yiu wrote:
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).
|