[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-tx] Issue 32 - Requirement for MixedOutcome
Section 3, lines 151-168. Mark. Ram Jeyaraman wrote: > Mark, > > Could you please provide the PDF line numbers in the referred document > that are relevant to this issue. Thanks. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ram Jeyaraman [mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com] > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 2:55 PM > To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [ws-tx] Issue 32 - Requirement for MixedOutcome > > This is identified as WS-TX issue 32. > > Please ensure follow-ups have a subject line starting "Issue 32 -" > (after any Re:, [ws-tx] etc.) > > =================================== > > Issue name: Requirement for MixedOutcome > > Issue type: spec > > Owner: Mark Little (mark.little@jboss.com) > > Reference documents: > > WS-BA specification: > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17203/ws > tx-wsba-1.1-spec-cd-01.pdf > <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17044/h > ttp://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17129/wst > x-wsat-1.1-spec-wd-04.pdf> > > Description: > > The MixedOutcome is not tested for in the interoperability scenarios > (AtomicOutcome is). This either needs to be fixed, with some scenarios > added, or we should remove the capability. I haven't seen any good > arguments for why we should have this protocol within the > BusinessActivity specification. If there is a requirement, then it seems > > more appropriate for a separate model (i.e., specification) to host > this. > > Proposed resolution: > > Remove MixedOutcome >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]