[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] implicite links of the runtime engine (was: Implicit <sequence> macro)
Ron, ++1 We've only been saying this for over a month now. The clock is ticking - the sooner we have the clear use cases and requirements - the sooner we can get the spec' job done we are supposed to. Thanks, DW. =============================================== Message text written by Ron Ten-Hove >I suspect a bit of a misunderstanding here. The issue about <sequence> that Bernd Eckenfels brought up has served to introduce a broader issue: what principles do we use to decide, consistently, which features are "in" and which are "out" of BPEL? BPEL is supposed to be an execution language (witness the E), yet we have features that are modelling oriented, and are useless in an execution language. This is important, not so much for the existing proposed features, but for all the additions and changes that doubtless will soon come. We need a clear focus and direction, and I, for one, hope that this issue will help the TC define them. -Ron<
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]