>
Prasad ... the pen is yours now for issue 200 and 201. (BTW, I think
201 is resolved with no change?)
Thanks Alex.. It is 210 not 201. There was typo in Diane's summary.
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi, all and Prasad,
I have made the following changes:
- Issue 192: wsbpel_msgprop.xsd is merged into wsbpel_main.xsd,
as
a result of Issue 192. It becomes obsolete. wsbpel_plinkType.xsd are
wsbpel_main.xsd updated also for Issue 192 also.
- Apply XSD changes for Issue 190 and Issue 136
- Apply changes Issue 111 and 11.1 for both spec text and XSD
changs
- Issue 147: rectify the definition of "forEach" (issue 147)
according to the issue 204 by adding "scope" (note: we still need to
apply the rest of issue 204.)
- Issue 145: XSD Changes was missing. Re-apply it there. And,
there
is a missing spot in spec text change as well. Made it consistent
again.
- Issue 213: I have made changes in both XSD and spec text.
Hence,
I guess Prasad does not need to make changes for Issue 213 anymore.
Prasad ... the pen is yours now for issue 200 and 201. (BTW, I think
201 is resolved with no change?)
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi all,
I am applying changes to the spec. Two things I would like to bring up:
- For Issue 213, the spec text is trivial by just dropping
<repeatEvery> under <pick>. So, I have apply changes for
both spec text and XSD for Issue 213. So I guess that should be OK to
everybody.
- For Issue 192, I have one question to ask: Both
wsbpel_main.xsd
and wsbpel_msgprop.xsd have the same targetNamespace. Issue 192
basically is to apply the same extensibility to propertyAlias and etc.
That is, propertyAlias will derive from the same "tExtensibleElements"
type. There are two routes to proceed to forward:
Which one do you guys prefer?
My thought so far is: merging two XSD is simpler. On the other hand,
for abstract BPEL XSD work, I suspect we need to have use
include/import eventually.
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Diane Jordan wrote:
Alex, Assaf and Prasad
participated.
Alex is working on 192, 11.1,
111
family
and schema updates for 136, 190 and 213.
When Alex is done, Prasad will
do
the
text changes for 200, 201 and 213.
Assaf will send an email to the
spec
editing team explaining the following conclusions we reached:
209: the resolution did not
include
necessary changes to make 14.7 consistent with 13.3.3. Assaf will
write up the change to 14.7 and review with the spec editing team. If
no one sees a problem, we will forward to the full TC so there is an
email
thread explaining the situation.
214: this added changes to
section
13.5 to make it consistent with the resolution to 112 (which included
changes to 11.3, 11.4 and 12.4). After 112, we passed 204 which
clarified
how to compensate an event handler. The edits for 204 were done before
214, and so didn't include changes to 13.5 (which wasn't changed till
the
resolution to 214). Assaf will send an email to the editing team
describing the clarification required for section 13.5 to make it
consisted
with the resolution to 204. If there is no problem, we will forward it
to the full TC list so there is an email thread explaining the
situation.
Both issues remain on the "to
do"
list for the spec editing team. Once we've seen the emails on the
changes, we'll assign them.
Regards, Diane
IBM Emerging Internet Software Standards
drj@us.ibm.com
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709
|