[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Comments RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 152 - New Proposal to Vote
> You think it's a bug, we think it's a feature! > We are going to have to agree to disagree, but it > certainly is not a burden to implement! I am trying to follow the arguments made in Issue 152. I find that I also have to look at Issue 34. I am looking at the July 30th, 2004 specification. I am looking at the example in section 16.3.2 which uses a service-ref element. However where is the reference-schema attribute as per section 7.4? Issue 34 mentions that a service-ref element should be included in a partnerlink. I do not see this association in the 16.3.2 example. Nor do I see any mention of the service-ref element in the partnerLinkType schema. What am I missing? I feel that it makes it that more difficult to assess arguments if the few examples available are not accurate. One of things I am trying to determine is what type of information is needed for a "compiler" and runtime todo type checking. I am making the assumption that BPEL is for the most part, a strongly typed language that can be statically type checked. Is this the wrong way to look at things? Cheers, Andrew
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]