Issue - 72 - Proposal to vote

["Furniss, Peter" <Peter.Furniss@choreology.com>]

Following the discussion on issue 72 on the list and on the 15 October
call, the following resolution is proposed, hoping for a vote at the
next conference call:


A The BPEL language definition shall not interpret
underspecified/erroneous
WSDL 1.1 features in a way that is contradictory with BP 1.0
interpretation

B Use-case artifacts shall be either BP 1.0 compliant or have a
necessary and
explained reason to be otherwise
		
C Use-cases shall be capable of implementation with exclusively BP 1.0
services or have a necessary and explained reason to be otherwise
			
D Conformant bpel engines shall be able to offer and use BP 1.0
services,
but are free to implement other bindings and encodings even with
soap/http

E No restriction is made on deployed bpel processes

---
These correspond to the A.1 as modified by Ugo, B3, C2, D2 and E2 of the
"Some proposals" message
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200310/msg00105.html

If you think these aren't right, please propose amendments prior to the
meeting so everyone gets a chance to see what's on offer.

Peter

------------------------------------------
Peter Furniss
Chief Scientist, Choreology Ltd

   Cohesions 1.0 (TM)
   Business transaction management software for application coordination

web: http://www.choreology.com
email:  peter.furniss@choreology.com
phone:  +44 870 739 0066  <-- new, from 4 August 2003
mobile: +44 7951 536168