OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: [wsbpel] Issue 278 - Clarification + Proposal for Vote


The intention on issue 278 is to achieve consistency about normative
statements and to remove duplicate normative text. At the San Jose F2F, we
moved a normative statement ("A <rethrow> activity is allowed to be used
within any fault handler and only within a fault handler") for the rethrow
language construct from section 12.4 to 5.2.

As a result, we have the following structure:
 - Section 5.2 only contains requirements related to the location of
activities (applies to <compensate>, <compensateScope>, and <rethrow>) (->
this is ok)
 - Section 10.4. (after issue 273) now has: "Non-start activities except
<scope>, <flow>, or <sequence> activities MUST have a control dependency on
a start activity" (-> add a reference in 5.2.)
 - Section 12.4.3. has a duplicate requirement related to the location of
<compensate> and <compensateScope> (-> drop lines 4758-4759)

Submitter's proposal: I move to resolve this issue in the following manner:

(1) In section 5.2., add a reference to 10.4. to the text for <receive> and
<pick> in 5.2: "See section 10.4. for control dependency constraints on
start activities.".
(2) In section 12.4.3., delete lines 4758-4759.

Simon Daniel Moser, M.Eng.
Business Process Solutions Development 1
IBM Boeblingen Laboratory
Schoenaicherstr. 220, 01/086
D - 71032 Boeblingen
Tel.: +49 - 7031 - 164304
IP Telephone Number (ITN): 39204304
email: smoser@de.ibm.com

Rule of thumb #3459835478: when you find yourself typing/copying the same
thing more than twice in a row, redesign or re-implement. No excuse

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]