Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 191 - Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from within While loop (New Proposed Issue Announcement)
I actually missed the createInstance="yes" in the example. I think the interesting issue is the same example without createInstance="yes" on the receive. It will then create a situation where a feature (rendezvous) designed to address non-deterministic order is used in a situation with very defined order. -----Original Message----- From: Dieter Koenig1 [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 2:28 AM To: email@example.com Cc: Danny van der Rijn; firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 191 - Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from within While loop (New Proposed Issue Announcement) +1. A createInstance="yes" is not legal inside of <while> (according to section 6.5), and issue 81 should not change that. Kind Regards DK "Yaron Y. Goland" <email@example.com> To 07.02.2005 20:40 Danny van der Rijn <firstname.lastname@example.org> cc Please respond to email@example.com ygoland Subject Re: [wsbpel] Issue 191 - Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from within While loop (New Proposed Issue Announcement) This issue has a dependency on issue 81. Issue 81 proposes adding the following language to section 11.4: "A receive/pick activity annotated in this way MUST be a "start activity". A "start activity" is an initial activity that has a createInstance="yes" attribute defined on it. An initial activity is a receive/pick activity where no other activities but scope, flow, sequence and empty activities occur before it in the process's execution path." The result of this language is that the receive would be illegal as the presence of the while activity would mean that the receive is not an initial activity and therefore cannot be a start activity and therefore is illegal. I actually think the example in 191 is already illegal even without 81 because section 6.5 as it currently stands requires that no 'base activity'/initial activity occur before a start activity. But I agree that the current language is ambiguous which is why 81 proposed clarifying matters. Yaron Danny van der Rijn wrote: > I must have formatted my mail to Tony incorrectly. The example should read: > > <process> > <sequence> > <while> > <receive createInstance="yes"> > <correlations> > <correlation initiate="rendezvous"/> > </correlations> > </receive> > </while> > ... > </sequence> > </process> > > Tony Fletcher wrote: > >> 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 <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel> 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 >> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/documents.php> - 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 >> <http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html>. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- >> >> >> Issue 191: Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from within While loop >> >> *Status:* received >> *Date added:* 4 Feb 2005 >> *Categories:* Correlation >> <file:///C:/Perlscripts/wsbpel_issues36.html#category_correlation> >> *Date submitted:* 4 February 2005 >> *Submitter:* Danny van der Rijn <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> >> *Description:* We came across the following edge case: >> >> <process> <sequence> >> >> <while> <receive createInstance="yes"> <correlations> <correlation >> initiate="rendezvous"/> </correlations> </receive> <while> ... </sequence> >> </process> >> >> in which an initial receive correlates with itself in a while loop. It appears >> to be valid from a syntactical point of view, and the execution semantics >> would follow naturally from the specification. >> >> *Submitter's proposal:* None other than to ask the question: should it >> explicitly be disallowed? >> >> *Changes:* 4 Feb 2005 - new issue >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Tony/ / >> >> / <http://www.choreology.com/>/ >> >> >> >> Tony Fletcher >> >> Technical Advisor >> Choreology Ltd. >> 68, Lombard Street, London EC3V 9L J UK >> >> Phone: >> >> >> >> +44 (0) 1473 729537 >> >> Mobile: >> >> >> >> +44 (0) 7801 948219// >> >> Fax: >> >> >> >> +44 (0) 870 7390077 >> >> Web: >> >> >> >> /www.choreology.com <http://www.choreology.com/>/ >> >> Cohesions(tm) >> >> Business transaction management software for application coordination >> >> Work: email@example.com >> >> Home: firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com> >> >> > 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_workgr oup.php .