Re: [wsbpel] Issue 82 - propsal for a vote (last, no change log)

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

> Khalaf: ....................A profile MUST not violate the common 
> base. Specifically, a profile defines
>
> (i) A URI that identifies the profile and is used as the value of the 
> abstractProcessProfile attribute by all abstract processes that belong 
> to the class defined by the profile.
> (ii) A class of abstract processes that is a subset of the common 
> base, i.e., the set of syntactically valid abstract processes that 
> belong to the profile. Note that the subset does not have to be 
> proper, i.e., it may include the entire common base. Examples include 
> profiles that disallow control links or certain types of opaque 
> tokens. Note further that the subset must be consistent with respect 
> to the use of the omission-shortcut. Specifically, if a profile limits 
> the use of opaque tokens in the class of abstract processes it covers, 
> then it can only permit those omissions that correspond to permitted 
> usage of opaque tokens. For instance, if a profile does not allow 
> attributes to be opaque, then abstract processes belonging to that 
> profile cannot omit attributes using the omission-shortcut.

mm1: We have not discussed that a profile would revise / subset the 
common base.