Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 182 - Proposal For Vote

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

Hi all,

This email serves a reminder to the editor team that we passed the proposal with a friendly amendment in today conf call to remove text related to "bpws:faultNotDefinedinWSDL" and enforcing matching the fault defined in WSDL and the fault used in <reply>.

That is we have remove the following pargraphs:

---------------------------------
In the case that a fault is being sent using a <reply> activity it is possible to enforce WSDL's fault semantics to some degree, to whit, the fault being sent MUST be defined on the portType and operation specified by the <reply> or an internal BPEL system fault (bpws:faultNotDefinedinWSDL) MUST be thrown internally and the <reply> activity will fail. Please see section "Providing Web Service Operations" for more details on the <reply> activity.
---------------------------------

---------------------------------
If the reply activity is to transmit a fault then the specified fault MUST be defined on the WSDL portType/operation or the reply activity MUST fail with a "bpws:faultNotDefinedinWSDL" fault.
---------------------------------

---------------------------------
If the reply activity is to transmit a fault then the specified fault MUST be defined on the WSDL portType/operation or the reply activity MUST fail with a "bpws:faultNotDefinedinWSDL" fault.
---------------------------------


Thanks.


Regards,
Alex Yiu