Issue - 178 - Correlation sets visible to an event handler

[Dieter Koenig1 <dieterkoenig@de.ibm.com>]

I agree that an event handler should see correlation sets defined both in
the scope the EH is defined in and in the parent scopes.

If the EH could only see correlation sets in the ancestor scopes then a
special rule would be needed for event handlers defined on the process
itself.

BTW, is it correct to assume that for CS referred to in EHs, the value of
the initiate attribute is always "no"?

Kind Regards
DK


ws-bpel issues list editor <peter.furniss@choreology.com> wrote on
02.11.2004 09:59:13:

> 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 - 178 - Correlation sets visible to an event handler
> Status: received
> Date added: 2 Nov 2004
> Categories: Correlation
> Date submitted: 01 November 2004
> Submitter: Yaron Y. Goland
> Description: The text in section 13.5 does not seem to specify which
> correlation sets are visible to an onMessage handler inside of an
> event handler. Does an event handler only see correlation sets in
> the ancestor scopes or can it also see correlation sets defined in
> the scope it is defined on?
> Submitter's proposal: I suspect the intention was that event
> handlers can see correlation sets both in the scope it is defined on
> and in the parent scopes but this needs to be made clear in the text.
> Changes: 2 Nov 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 - 178 - [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 - 178 - 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).
>
>
> Choreology Anti virus scan completed