Issue - 111 - Syntax Choices for Extension Activity (Web Ballot)

[Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>]

Hi all,

Here is the details of the web ballot (proposed) for Extension Activity Syntax.

The web-ballot is NORMATIVE. That is, a binding vote on a partial solution for 111 which would then constrain the remaining completion of the resolution. Similar to what we did with 82 where we approved a partial solution that set a direction and filled in the details later with a vote on the additions.

In short, we shall finish the actual proposal for Issue 111 to vote based on the result of this web-ballot.

(I hope the color scheme make it easier for comparision)

Option #1: moving the extension to wrapper to generic extension points (<extendedBy>)
-----------------------------
<sequence>
    <extendedBy>
        <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz" />
    </extendedBy>
    ...
    <invoke name="myInvoke"
                  foo:activityExtension2="abc"
                  operation="op1" ...>
        <extendedBy>
            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
        </extendedBy>
        <targets> ... </targets>
        <sources> ... </sources>
    </invoke>
    <bar:myInvoke name="myExtendedInvoke"
                  foo:activityExtension2="abc"
                  operation="op1" ...>
        <extendedBy>
            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
        </extendedBy>
        <targets> ... </targets>
        <sources> ... </sources>
    </bar:myInvoke>
</sequence>
-----------------------------
Related to: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200503/msg00040.html

Option #2: Using <extensibleActivityWrapper> and having all standard attribute and elements and generic extension points (both attr and elem) local to the extended activity element itself (i.e. <bar:myInvoke>).
-----------------------------
<sequence>
    <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz" />
    ...
    <invoke name="myInvoke"
                      foo:activityExtension2="abc"
                      operation="op1" ...>
            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
            <targets> ... </targets>
            <sources> ... </sources>
    </invoke>
    <extensibleActivityWrapper>
        <bar:myInvoke name="myExtendedInvoke"
                      foo:activityExtension2="abc"
                      operation="op1" ...>
            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
            <targets> ... </targets>
            <sources> ... </sources>
        </bar:myInvoke>
    </extensibleActivityWrapper>
</sequence>
-----------------------------


Option #3: Using <extensibleActivityWrapper> and having all standard attribute and elements and generic extension attr on the wrapper, but having  generic extension element local to the extended activity element itself (i.e. <bar:myInvoke>)
-----------------------------
<sequence>
    <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz" />
    ...
    <invoke name="myInvoke"
                  foo:activityExtension2="abc"
                  operation="op1" ...>
        <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
        <targets> ... </targets>
        <sources> ... </sources>
    </invoke>
    <extensibleActivityWrapper name="myExtendedInvoke"
                               foo:activityExtension2="abc">
        <targets> ... </targets>
        <sources> ... </sources>
        <bar:myInvoke operation="op1" ...>
           <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>
        </bar:myInvoke>
    </extensibleActivityWrapper>
</sequence>
-----------------------------

Option #4: Other:
Please state your alternative opinion. E.g.: you can simply state your position, if you don't support extension activity in general in BPEL.



Thanks so much!!!



Regards,
Alex Yiu