Re: [ws-caf-editors] Clarification on issue #136

["Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>]

I thought the agreed motion was that the parent context was mandatory, but
that it could be a subset of the entire hierarchy. However, I was listening
by phone at the time.

Mark.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simeon Greene" <simeon.m.greene@oracle.com>
To: <ws-caf-editors@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 8:45 PM
Subject: [ws-caf-editors] Clarification on issue #136


> see http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=136.
>
> The latest comments state:
> Change parent context from list to zero or one occurrence and further
> change
> parentsā?T context to parentā?Ts context. Alistair motioned Greg second.
No
> opposed. 8 in favor.
>
> It then goes on to say:
> begin with passed context must set the parent context.
>
> A strict interpretation of the text makes these two excerpts
> contradictory in my opinion.  The former excerpt says the element should
> be optional "zero or one occurrence", yet the latter says that the begin
> operation "must" set it.  This will cause a conflict between the schema
> and the spec.  I recommend we either change "must" to "may" or make
> parent context a mandatory element of the context.  I prefer the first
> recommendation.
>
>