[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 82 - Proposal for Vote
rkhalaf wrote: > Hi Monica, > > The proposal in (1) makes abstract BPEL's syntax a strict superset of > executable BPEL. This is not what is in the specification. > > The issue 82 is to clarify what abstract bpel is (mainly wordsmithing > as the issue states) and to have a better definition not to change > what it is or how it is. The other issues are being used to do that > such as 107 etc .. Changing structure goes under rearchitecting. > mm1: This restriction was not a part of the subgroup discussion, and clearly was not placed on the scope of the recent TC participation until you specified it. Why did the subgroup spend 5+ months trying to define it if the boundary was the specification as a gate? To coin Satish, this is 'false economy.' Thank you.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]