Hi, all,
A week ago, Diane and I exhanged a couple of emails on how to make
namespace URI of BPEL becomes "oasis"-compatible.
Based on:
an example from WS-security:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd
and
an OASIS document:
http://www.oasis-open.org/spectools/docs/chairs-filenaming-02.html#ss.tc.output.rules
I came with a suggestion and I sent to Diane.
As of the last editing subgroup conf call, Diane suggested me to send
to the editing group to see how you guys feel about that.
Please see the email below.
Thanks! :-)
Regards,
Alex Yiu
-------- Original Message --------
Hi Diane,
Thanks for the info.
Here is what I suggest:
The targetNamespace URI would look like this:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/YYYY/MM/filename
Using the convention from:
http://www.oasis-open.org/spectools/docs/chairs-filenaming-02.html#ss.tc.output.rules
draft version of filenames will be:
wsbpel-????-1.1-draft-YYYYMM.xsd
final version of files will be:
wsbpel-????-1.1-cs.xsd
???? = description of one of following:
(1) main
(2) plinkType
(3) msgprop
(4) abstract
E.g.
wsbpel-main-1.1-draft-200403.xsd
wsbpel-abstract-1.1-draft-200403.xsd
What do you think?
If that is OK, I will send a follow up email to the full TC.
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Diane Jordan wrote:
fyi
Regards, Diane
IBM Dynamic e-business Technologies
drj@us.ibm.com
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123
----- Forwarded by
Diane
Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 05/11/2004 11:54 AM -----
Diane:
Yeah, that's a good example. http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel
is your
tree; below that use the file naming scheme at
http://www.oasis-open.org/spectools/docs/chairs-filenaming-02.html
-Karl
Diane Jordan wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Is there any guidance on the uri we should use for the schema that
will
> accompany the spec?
>
> Regards, Diane
> IBM Dynamic e-business Technologies
> drj@us.ibm.com
> (919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123
>
> ----- Forwarded by Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 05/11/2004 09:17 AM
-----
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
>
> 05/10/2004 10:46 PM
>
> To
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
> cc
> wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject
> Re: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - next execution step
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I guess OASIS-based namespaces will look like this:
>
>
http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd
> (copied from WS security)
>
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
> Alex Yiu wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here is the suggestion for the next execution step for Issue 24 -
> fowarding from editing subgroup to the full TC list for a boarder
scope
> of request for comments ... (as suggested by Diane)
>
> Diane also mentioned that it may be a good time to move to
OASIS-based
> namespaces.
>
> Any opinion?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:
> Fw: [wsbpel-spec-edit] [Fwd: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate
schemata
> for abstract and executable processes]
> Date:
> Mon, 10 May 2004 14:12:03 -0400
> From:
> Diane Jordan <drj@us.ibm.com> <mailto:drj@us.ibm.com>
> To:
> bpel spec <wsbpel-spec-edit@lists.oasis-open.org>
> <mailto:wsbpel-spec-edit@lists.oasis-open.org>
> CC:
> Rossomando, Philip <Philip.Rossomando@unisys.com>
> <mailto:Philip.Rossomando@unisys.com>,
nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com
> <mailto:nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
> Alex, this sounds like good progress - thanks to all who
participated.
> As I recall the resolution to issue 24 was approved by the TC, but
there
> were several folks interested in seeing the details of the
resolution
as
> well - when you feel this is complete enough, please forward to
the
full
> TC for review. I don't think we should have to revote it, but
should
> give everyone a chance to see it and bring up any questions or
comments.
> Thanks.
> Regards, Diane
> IBM Dynamic e-business Technologies
> drj@us.ibm.com
<mailto:drj@us.ibm.com>
> (919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123
>
> ----- Forwarded by Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 05/10/2004 02:04 PM
-----
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
<mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com>
>
> 05/07/2004 03:34 PM
>
>
> To
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
<mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com>
> cc
> wsbpel-spec-edit@lists.oasis-open.org
> <mailto:wsbpel-spec-edit@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject
> Re: [wsbpel-spec-edit] [Fwd: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate
schemata
> for abstract and executable processes]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi, all editor subgroup members,
>
> We had a conf call with Phil (from Unisys), John and Satish, Nick
and me
> on some general abstract BPEL discussion (Thursday - May 06).
>
> I got an action item to make the changes to schema and spec to
reflect
> Issue 24 resolution, i.e., separate the schemas under two
namespaces.
> Here are my suggested changes of phrase-1:
>
> (1) create two namespace URI:
> "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/03/business-process/"
for executable
> BPEL
> "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/03/business-process/abstract"
for
> abstract BPEL
>
> (2) remove abstractProcess="yes|no"attribute in the process
definition
> Using the namespace and/or prefixes to denote whether this is an
> abstract or executable process. E.g.:
> <bpws:process
>
xmlns:bpws="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/03/business-process/">
> <bpwsa:process
>
xmlns:bpwsa="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/03/business-process/abstract">
>
> (3) Going through the spec apply the above changes in (2). E.g.
(i)
> adding namespace URIs to Section 2. (ii) remove abstractProcess
> attribute reference in Section 6.2, Section 16 and other examples.
>
> (4) create a XSD file "wsbpel_abstract.xsd", which is just
a temporary
> place holder to point to the new namespace as the targetNamespace
and
> which defines an element which extends from the executable
tProcess
> type. Please note that this schema extension extension is a just
> temporarily arrangement. We shall work on details of separating
the
> schemas in phrase-2 after we vote on Issue 107, 99 and etc.
>
>
> What do you guys think?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
> Alex Yiu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Forwarding to the editing group email list to move the actual
discussion
> there ...
> Thanks!
>
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:
> Re: [wsbpel] Issue 24 - separate schemata for abstract and
executable
> processes
> Date:
> Wed, 05 May 2004 19:59:56 -0700
> From:
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
<mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com>
> To:
> wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
<mailto:wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> CC:
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
<mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com>
> References:
>
<DE9056188C44404585190D5D869CB9CE09ED08@seedebrsales.seeburger.de>
>
<mailto:DE9056188C44404585190D5D869CB9CE09ED08@seedebrsales.seeburger.de>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> (Cross posting from Issue 99)
>
> Judging from the resolution of Issue 24,
> (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200401/msg00013.html)
> we want to have two namespaces.
>
> Issue 24 execution has been in the "kitchen" sink for a
while. I would
> suggest the editing subgroup (including myself) to make a small
> incremental change first to the spec in the coming few weeks to
reflect
> the desire of having two namespaces.
>
> After voting on issue 99, 107 and etc, we will work the remaining
> details for Issue 24, i.e. separating those 2 schemas while
keeping
some
> linkage in using XML Schema construct.
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
>
>
--
=================================================================
Karl F. Best
Vice President, OASIS
office +1 978.667.5115 x206 mobile +1 978.761.1648
karl.best@oasis-open.org
http://www.oasis-open.org
|