[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea!
I imagine that expression= is as relevant to "to" as to "from" .. -----Original Message----- From: Maciej Szefler [mailto:mbs@fivesight.com] Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 8:47 AM To: Dieter Roller; Satish Thatte Cc: Alex Yiu; Assaf Arkin; wsbpeltc; ygoland@bea.com Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea! I haven't followed this discussion too closely, but am I correct in inferring that if these suggestion were adopted, we could eliminate most of the from-specs in the assign activity? Could we normalize assignment to the following <copy> <to variable="msgVar"/> <from expression="$otherMsgVar"/> </copy> could be used to assign a message variable. <copy> <to variable="simpleTypeVar"/> <from expression="$msgVar/msg/simplePart"/> </copy> <copy> <to variable="simpleTypeVar"/> <from expression="$otherSimpleTypeVar"/> </copy> could be used to assign a simple variable <copy> <to variable="elementVar"/> <from expression="$msgVar/msg/elementPartType"/> </copy> <copy> <to variable="elementVar"/> <from expression="$otherElementVar"/> </copy> could be used to assign an element variable. -maciej On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:23:35 +0100, Dieter Roller <ROL@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 > > Cheers, > > dieter > > > > > > > > > "Satish Thatte" > <satisht@microsof > t.com> > To > "Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com>, > 03/12/2004 05:14 "Alex Yiu" <alex.yiu@oracle.com> > AM > cc > "wsbpeltc" > <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>, > <ygoland@bea.com> > Subject > RE: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good > Idea! > > > > > > > > > > > I am having trouble keeping up with this fast moving discussion. I am > hoping that you will reach an agreement and then educate the mere > mortals among us on what the consensus proposal is .. > > Satish > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:59 PM > To: Alex Yiu > Cc: wsbpeltc; Satish Thatte; ygoland@bea.com > Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea! > > >> (4) >> Assaf suggested: >> In WSDL 2.0, >> $variable/ns:element[/ns:subElement] >> In WSDL 1.1, >> $variable/partName/ns:element >> >> I was wondering whether it make sense to add a WSDL QNAME >> (ns:wsdlMsgName) like the following for WSDL 1.1: >> >> $variable/ns:wsdlMsgName/partName/... >> >> then the syntax would be more symmetrically between WSDL 1.1 and 2.0 >> ns:wsdlMsgName => ns:element >> partname => subElement >> >> The BPEL code migration may be easier from WSDL 1.1 to 2.0 > > If anyone has a good handle on where WSDL 2.0 is heading with their > message definition, would be great to throw some ideas around. Ideally > if you have a WSDL 2.0 interface that's backward compatible with WSDL > 1.1, you could use the BPEL process with both 1.1 and 2.0 without > change. > > Assaf > > > > 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_workgr oup.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_workgr oup.php. > -- Maciej Szefler [mbs(a)fivesight.com] [+1-312-432-0556x226]
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]