Forward this email to Issue 190 email thread.
Regards,
Alex
-------- Original Message --------
Hi all,
On Issue 190, an update:
After some further discussion, it seems that some of us have a
consensus that a scope-level override is easier to explain than a
fault-level override. And, a scope-level override seems to be a
balanced choice that makes a number of people comfortable.
In short, we will go back to DK's original and keeping the
exitOnStandardFault switch on the <scope> level:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200506/msg00090.html
PLUS the clarification amendment [Choice-B] in my
previous email:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200506/msg00098.html
==============================
if "exitOnStandardFault" attribute of
a particular
<process> or <scope> is set to "yes", a <catch> fault
handler construct which targets a WS-BPEL standard fault MUST not be
used. This condition MUST be detected by static analysis and the
process definition of this kind MUST be rejected.
==============================
As far as I can tell, the clarification amendment would be considered
friendly.
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Diane Jordan wrote:
The next call of the WS BPEL TC
will be on Wed. June 22 at 8 am Pacific. Dial in info is: USA &
Canada Toll Free Number: +1 866 500 6738, Pass code: 600345, All Others
(toll): +1 203 480 8000, Pass code: 600345. We will also have access
to LiveMeeting - see the calendar entry for more info on accessing it.
Brief summary of June 15 meeting:
180 - proposal adopted no
objections.
190 - deferred - proposal amended
with
"have attribute only on process". Alex to send email with
another proposal.
199 - proposal adopted with no
objections
203 - proposal adopted with no
objections
92.3 - proposal adopted no obj.
92.4 - deferred to next meeting -
everyone
should read the proposal
92.6 - deferred due to pending
change
to proposal from Alex
92.5 - proposal adopted no obj.
96.1 - deferred due to pending
update
to proposal from Yaron
Proposed agenda for next meeting:
- Nomination/volunteers to take minutes for this call
- Roll call/determine quorum
- Review/accept minutes from previous meetings - May 25, June 1-3,
June 8
- Review agenda
- Liaison subgroup report
- Use case subgroup report
- Requirements and Issues Coordination subgroup report
- Specification Editing subgroup report
- Implementation subgroup report
Issue discussion. Note we will follow the process agreed to at the
f2f: Discussions of any issue on calls be limited to no more than 30
minutes
at the end of which the person who made the motion can choose to table
to next meeting or force a vote (without requiring 2/3 majority to stop
discussion). Those who want to continue to discuss need to go off
line to work the issue. At next meeting progress should be reported
– or issue will go to vote with original proposal. If issue goes
to a vote process starts again as above. If results of offline
discussions
result in amended proposal to vote, the new proposal should be provided
to the TC in advance of voting meeting.
– 157
– 190
– 92.4,
92.6,
- 96.1
- 139.1
– 111
– 141
– 196
delay till week after 199
- 180
– Motions
to open new issues (209-217)
Long running issues
-> 88 pending new proposal
-> 177 pending resolution of two
new issues (212 and 214)
-> issue 9: deferred pending
inclusion
of 84 in spec
-> issue 125: pending 51
-> issue 169: deferred pending
conclusion
of 190
-> 11: defer pending resolution
to
51, 157, maybe 125. Yaron to provide info on infoset.
-> 99: defer pending 82.3
-> 6.2
Agenda for next meeting
New business
Regards,
John Evdemon and Diane Jordan
WS-BPEL TC Co-chairs
|