Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to <reply> to

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

Dieter -



i apparently just missed some parts of the spec that disallow the case that
i was thinking about.  i think this is a non-issue.



danny



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dieter Roller" <ROL@de.ibm.com>
To: <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 12:55 AM
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to <reply> to


>
> Danny,
>
> I'm still having problems understanding the issue. As the specs say,
> partnerLink, portType, operation, and correlation set make the receives
> unique. As the reply references the same properties, there should be no
> problem.
>
> dieter
>
>
>
> |---------+---------------------------->
> |         |           Danny van der    |
> |         |           Rijn             |
> |         |           <dannyv@tibco.com|
> |         |           >                |
> |         |                            |
> |         |           09/05/2003 01:27 |
> |         |           AM               |
> |         |                            |
> |---------+---------------------------->
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------|
>   |
|
>   |       To:       wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
|
>   |       cc:
|
>   |       Subject:  Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to
<reply> to                                                             |
>   |
|
>   |
|
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
> i'd like to re-open discussion on this issue, since i think that i worded
> the original statement poorly, and then dropped the ball.
>
> i mention "outstanding" receives not in the sense of the spec:
> "A business process instance MUST NOT simultaneously enable two or more
> receive
> activities for the same partnerLink, portType, operation and correlation
> set(s)."
>
> but in the sense of request/replies that have been received, but not yet
> replied to.  i don't see anything in the current spec that forbids that,
> and
> in that case, <reply> will not be able to disambiguate.
>
> arkin's issue 26 arrives at the same problem, but gets there a different
> way.
>
>
>
> danny
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny van der Rijn" <dannyv@tibco.com>
> To: <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 3:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to <reply> to
>
>
> > 1) if the status response is somehow tied to the contents of the request
> > message (status of x vs. status of y) then there's a problem.
> >
> > 2) the same issue can be a problem in processes where the request/reply
> > isn't simply a request for status.
> >
> > danny
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dieter Roller" <rol@de.ibm.com>
> > To: "Danny van der Rijn" <dannyv@tibco.com>
> > Cc: <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 10:27 PM
> > Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to <reply> to
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Danny,
> > >
> > > two answers:
> > >
> > > (1) I don't think there  is a problem with multiple concurrent status
> > > requests. In this case it is clear to which receive the reply goes.
> > >
> > > (2) I'm not sure that I understand your comment with other business
> > cases..
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > > dieter
> > >
> > > PS/I will on vacation the next two weeks and therefore will be unable
> to
> > > respond to your answers....
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > |---------+---------------------------->
> > > |         |           Danny van der    |
> > > |         |           Rijn             |
> > > |         |           <dannyv@tibco.com|
> > > |         |           >                |
> > > |         |                            |
> > > |         |           08/14/2003 09:42 |
> > > |         |           PM               |
> > > |         |                            |
> > > |---------+---------------------------->
> > >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > >   |
> > |
> > >   |       To:       Dieter Roller/Germany/IBM@IBMDE,
> > wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> > |
> > >   |       cc:
> > |
> > >   |       Subject:  Re: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s
> to
> > <reply> to                                                             |
> > >   |
> > |
> > >   |
> > |
> > >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ah, i see.  is the only reason for this that otherwise it would open
up
> > > issue 49?  i can see lots of uses for this, especially with the event
> > > handlers (how do you guard against multiple concurrent status
> requests?),
> > > but also business uses.
> > >
> > > thanks
> > > danny
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Dieter Roller" <rol@de.ibm.com>
> > > To: <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 12:50 AM
> > > Subject: [wsbpel] Issue 49 - Disambiguating <receive>s to <reply> to
> > >
> > >
> > > > Danny,
> > > >
> > > > this would result in a conflictingRequest exception unless the
> > > correlation
> > > > sets differ ...
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > dieter
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
> the OASIS TC), go to
>
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>