[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea!
even so, if we add the ability to have assign create new nodes (issue 11), then this syntax wouldn't work. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maciej Szefler" <mbs@fivesight.com> To: "Danny van der Rijn" <dannyv@tibco.com>; "wsbpeltc" <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea! > This might not be a problem if it were possible to define copy assignment > in terms of node-replacement operations; then any expression that returns > a node could act as an l-value to an assignment. Such a scheme could rely > exclusively on schema-based type checking (with an implied schema for > message variables). > -maciej > > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:12:04 -0800, Danny van der Rijn <dannyv@tibco.com> > wrote: > > > i wouldn't think so, since $var refers to the value, not the location. > > but > > being just a mere mortal, i am open to being corrected. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com> > > To: "Maciej Szefler" <mbs@fivesight.com>; "Dieter Roller" > > <ROL@de.ibm.com> > > Cc: "Alex Yiu" <alex.yiu@oracle.com>; "Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com>; > > "wsbpeltc" <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>; <ygoland@bea.com> > > Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 8:52 AM > > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea! > > > > > > I imagine that expression= is as relevant to "to" as to "from" .. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Maciej Szefler [mailto:mbs@fivesight.com] > > Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 8:47 AM > > To: Dieter Roller; Satish Thatte > > Cc: Alex Yiu; Assaf Arkin; wsbpeltc; ygoland@bea.com > > Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea! > > > > I haven't followed this discussion too closely, but am I correct in > > inferring that if these suggestion were adopted, we could eliminate most > > > > of the from-specs in the assign activity? Could we normalize assignment > > to > > the following > > > > <copy> > > <to variable="msgVar"/> > > <from expression="$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] > > 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. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]