RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 103 - Moving Forward

["Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>]

So if I understand this correctly, you are proposing that we do two things with the partial resolution

1.  Allow BPEL variables of XML types/elements to be bound into XPath using the $ notation

2.  Define the BPEL context for XPath more precisely including differentiating normal vs join expressions

I certainly support 2.  I am a bit concerned about a schizophrenic resolution of variable binding.  One of the reasons I liked the $ notation was that it clearly defined the point of binding, eliminating any races (at least in my naïve understanding of XPath) in cases of multiple occurrences of getVariableData in an expression, which is evaluated concurrently with updates to those variables.  Now we would have a split brain on this issue.

Satish

-----Original Message-----
From: Danny van der Rijn [mailto:dannyv@tibco.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 9:27 AM
Cc: wsbpeltc
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 103 - Moving Forward

+1

Alex Yiu wrote:

>
> A big +1 from me.
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
> Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
>
>> Any time a proposal gets too big it can be difficult to make progress 
>> because too many issues get mixed up together. As such I propose that 
>> we break issue 103 into separate proposals, much as we did with issue 
>> 10.
>>
>> The first proposal I think should go out for a vote would be a 
>> modified version of the current 103 proposal that removes the WSDL 
>> binding to XPATH variables, keeps the getVariableData function and 
>> doesn't change the current from-specs and to-specs.
>>
>> This proposal would just include the binding of non-WSDL BPEL 
>> variables to XPATH variables along with defining the XPATH 
>> environment in which various BPEL expressions execute.
>>
>> Then when we settle exactly how we would like to model WSDL variables 
>> we can decide the future of getVariableData(), how WSDL variables 
>> will appear in XPATH (including any special forms for doc/lit), if we 
>> would like to allow properties to be bound to variables, what 
>> from-spec and to-specs we want to use, etc.
>>
>> I believe that by breaking this problem up into discrete issues we 
>> can make more rapid progress.
>>
>> What does the group think?
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>         Yaron
>>
>> 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. 
>>
>>
>
>
>
> 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. 
>
>
>

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.