Re: [wsbpel] Issue 115: Proposal to vote

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Satish,
Thank you for the clarification. However, this is somewhat confusing:

    * The Appendix C is self contained.  It should be complete,
      consistent and represent the syntax and semantics. STRAIGHTFORWARD.
    * Revision requires deleting dependencies. STRAIGHTFORWARD

So if we have clear semantics and syntax, and we delete the 
dependencies, could I assume it would be straightforward to provide an 
update to the team or, as Martin suggested, a detailed explanation of 
the revised Appendix C? Thank you.

>Thatte2: Appendix C is in essence self contained as it stands if the references to WS-BA are removed.  The main work is to make sure that it is a complete and internally consistent description of our semantics, adding further explanations that are needed for clarity. 
>
>>>Thatte1: Fairly straightforward I think.  Appendix C is primarily a state machine which explains the "protocol" between nested scopes in BPEL.  There is no essential dependency on any external specification.  It is simply an aid to understanding our rather intricate fault and compensation handling semantics.  That is how the new version of the appendix would be written, i.e., as an explanation of BPEL inter-scope semantics with no references to external specifications.
>>>      
>>>