[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro
Now if we had the issues process ready we could log this. Jeff/Dieter/Yaron, where are we with that? Satish -----Original Message----- From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:28 AM To: edwink@collaxa.com; Satish Thatte; Yuzo Fujishima; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro I agree. If we decide that sequence shortcuts are not good, then we should be consistent throughout the spec and eliminate existing shortcuts. Or we should provide a rationale for why existing shortcuts like compensation are the only good ones. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Edwin Khodabakchian [mailto:edwink@collaxa.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:30 PM > To: 'Satish Thatte'; 'Yuzo Fujishima'; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro > > > +1. Could we please apply the same logic to exception and compensation > shortcuts? Shortcuts are evil! :-) > > Edwin > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:25 PM > > To: Yuzo Fujishima; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > Yuzo, > > > > If we expected people to directly author processes at this > > level something like this would be attractive, but do you > > really expect that? > > > > Satish > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Yuzo Fujishima [mailto:fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:15 PM > > To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro > > > > Hi, > > > > I would like to propose what may be called "implicit sequence". > > > > Implicit sequence "macro": > > If multiple activities are placed in a process definition > > where only one activity is allowed per se, assume there is an > > implicit sequence activity that contains the activities. > > > > Example: > > > > Regard > > <scope> > > <receive/> > > <invoke/> > > <reply/> > > </scope> > > as > > <scope> > > <sequence> <!-- implicit sequence --> > > <receive/> > > <invoke/> > > <reply/> > > </sequence> > > </scope> > > > > Pros: > > * More concise description. > > > > Cons: > > * ? > > > > What do you think? > > > > Yuzo Fujishima > > NEC Corporation > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]