OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 177 - Inconsistent optional/required natureof @Variable on onMessage, onEvent and Receive


Hi Dieter,

Yes these two issues (97 and 177) are aligned. 97 is asking to clarify that the @variable must be optional on all these for abstract processes. 177 is asking to spec that clearly for both executable and abstract processes and also eliminate the inconsistencies that exist in this area, at several places throughout the spec.

Regards, Prasad

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 177 - Inconsistent optional/required nature of @Variable on onMessage, onEvent and Receive
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:24:22 +0200
From: Dieter Koenig1 <dieterkoenig@de.ibm.com>
To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org

Hi Prasad, I would expect variable references to be required in executable
processes and optional in abstract processes. This is what I tried to
address in issue 97. I agree that it is currently inconsistent. Is issue
177 trying to aim in the same direction? Issue 97 is also related to the
abstract process family of issues (e.g., 82, 91, 107).
Kind Regards
DK


ws-bpel issues list editor <peter.furniss@choreology.com> wrote on
29.10.2004 20:07:28:

> This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list with a status of
> "received". The status will be changed to "open" if the TC accepts
> it as identifying a bug in the spec or decides it should be accepted
> specially. Otherwise it will be closed without further consideration
> (but will be marked as "Revisitable")
> The issues list is posted as a Technical Committee document to the
> OASIS WSBPEL TC pages on a regular basis. The current edition, as a
> TC document, is the most recent version of the document entitled in
> the "Issues" folder of the WSBPEL TC document list - the next
> posting as a TC document will include this issue. The list editor's
> working copy, which will normally include an issue when it is
> announced, is available at this constant URL.
> Issue - 177 - Inconsistent optional/required nature of @Variable on
> onMessage, onEvent and Receive
> Status: received
> Date added: 28 Oct 2004
> Categories: Syntax & semantics
> Date submitted: 28 October 2004
> Submitter: Prasad Yendluri
> Document: WSBPEL Working Draft, September 8, 2004
> Description: The optional or required nature of Variable attribute
> is inconsistent in the specification. On <receive> activity,
> onMessage clause of the <Pick> activity the @variable is optional.
> Where as on <onEvent> handler the @variable is required.
> Additionally per section 15.1 it is permissible in abstract
> processes to omit the variable reference attributes from the
> <invoke/>, <receive/>, and <reply/> activities. However for
> executable processes there is no specification on the optional or
> required nature of @variable. In the case of OnEvent handler which
> can have several simultaneous active instances, the @variable is
> defined to be of @messageType declared within an implicit scope
> associated with the event handler; upon receipt of the input message
> the event handler is required to assign the input message to the
> variable before proceeding to perform the event handler activity,
> which makes the @variable required. This inconsistency of optional
> and required nature of the @variable on different activities seems
> to be a source of confusion, that needs to be clarified in the
specification.
> Submitter's proposal: Consistently require the @variable on all
> these activities for executable processes, making it optional for
> abstract processes only.
> Changes: 28 Oct 2004 - new issue

> To comment on this issue (including whether it should be accepted),
> please follow-up to this announcement on the wsbpel@lists.oasis-
> open.org list (replying to this message should automatically send
> your message to that list), or ensure the subject line as you send it
starts
> "Issue - 177 - [anything]" or is a reply to such a message. If you
> want to formally propose a resolution to an open issue, please start
> the subject line "Issue - 177 - Proposed resolution", without any
> Re: or similar.
> To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document (but the
> address for new issue submission is the sender of this announcement).



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]