RE: [wsbpel] Implicit <sequence> macro

["Glenn Mi" <gmi@collaxa.com>]

Agree with Ron and Edwin.

I have some experiance with manually authoring BEPL. The most difficult part
seems to be to make sure the references to the WSDL artifacts are correct.
In my
opinion, if the programmer can handle the complexities of namespaces,
partnerLinks, etc.,
he/she should not have any problem following any given BPEL syntax.

Introducing anomalies for the sake of saving a few key strokes will actually
cause more problems, like compicating the debugger, etc.

I would be happy to see that the faultHandler shortcut for <invoke> be
removed.

Glenn Mi



> I think Ugo was refering to the <invoke> activity, which has a short-cut
> form for providing a compensation handler. Page 72 explains that it is a
> shortcut to avoid explicitly defining a scope.
>
> These seems an odd optimization, to save a minor amount of typing. The
> authors were perhaps envisioning BPEL process designers equipped only
> with vi?
>
> -Ron