Re: [ebxml-bp] Dynamic (late) binding proposal - take 2 now with diagram

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Anders,

I'm not happy with tinkering with syntax - you end up
having to make every piece of the BPSS do this - ugly.

I thought what Martin had previously suggested and
put into the schema - using substitutions - was a
good compromise that married the ability to use a
global context mechanism with the need for an inline
modification technique.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anders W. Tell" <anderst@toolsmiths.se>
To: <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:21 PM
Subject: [ebxml-bp] Dynamic (late) binding proposal - take 2 now with
diagram


> Please find the following diagram outlining one way of formulating
> dynamic or late bound TimeToPerform or similar parameters.
>
> At the top there is a abstract superclass that does not turn up in the
> document, the concrete subclasses does.
>
> The BindingTime speficies when binding occurs, i.e. which
> collaborationEvent(s). (maybe this should also be an element?)
> Default value is the value before binding occurs
> TTP duration can be ORed together with Union.
>
> <TimeToPerform boundWhen="enclosingCollaborationInitiationEvent">
>   <Union>
>       <StaticTimeToPerform>2h<StaticTimeToPerform>
>
> <RequestMessageTTP>//MessageEnvelope//ResponceTime</RequestMessageTTP>
>   </Union>
> <TimeToPerform>
>
> This patterm may be used for other parameters that are candidates for
> dynamic binding..
>
> /anders
>
> -- 
> /////////////////////////////////////
> / Business Collaboration Toolsmiths /
> / website: <www.toolsmiths.se>      /
> / email: <anderst@toolsmiths.se>    /
> / phone:  +46 8 562 262 30          /
> / mobile: +46 70 546 66 03          /
> /////////////////////////////////////
>
>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----