Re: Editing of Issue 120

[Danny van der Rijn <dannyv@tibco.com>]

Alexandre -

I wasn't at the Raleigh F2F where this was decided.  (You might want to check the minutes.)  However, I would say that use of implementation-specific correlation isn't dependent on the absence of explicit correlation.

Alexandre Alves wrote:

Danny,

 

The proposed resolution of issue 120 is not very detailed (http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html#Issue120). As I think you were the champion for this issue, please confirm if my editing is satisfactory:

 

In Section 9.2:

 

- from:

 

The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost every messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because WS-BPEL does not assume the use of any sophisticated conversational transport protocols for messaging. In cases where such protocols are used, the explicit use of correlation in WS-BPEL can be reduced to those activities that establish the conversational connections

 

- to:

The examples in this section show correlation being used on almost every messaging activity (receive, reply, and invoke). This is because WS-BPEL does not assume the use of any sophisticated conversational transport protocols for messaging. In cases where such protocols are used, the explicit use of correlation in WS-BPEL can be reduced to those activities that establish the conversational connections. In another words, if there is no explicit correlation set used in an inbound messaging activity (initial or non-initial), an implicit implementation-specific correlation mechanism MAY be used.

Thanks,