Makes sense to me. Simpler and better.
Thanks.
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Danny van der Rijn wrote:
You've now got a sentence in there that I think adds nothing, and is
confusing. I would remove the sentence in brackets, and reword the 2nd
to last sentence.
From
--------------------------------
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other
namespaces
available. [They must be understood by a WS-BPEL processor.] If the
WS-BPEL Processor does not support one or more of these XPath extension
namespaces then the process definition MUST be rejected. This
requirement MUST be statically enforced.
--------------------------------
To
--------------------------------
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other
namespaces
available. If a process definition contains XPath functions of other
namespaces, a WS-BPEL Processor that does not support one or more of
these XPath extension
functions MUST reject the process. This
requirement MUST be statically enforced.
--------------------------------
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi Simon,
I understand your intent.
However, the <import> mechanism in the spec has only covered
importing WSDL and XSD. Of course, it may be extended to importing
XPath functions.
But, I would hesitate to do so. Because:
- What exactly does the location of XPath function definition
mean
in <import>? [I have a feeling that we are dancing around the
elephant again.]
- And, for XPath function there should be no option for
mustUnderstand (which needs to be always true).
While I feel comfortable with the second part of your word smithing:
"If a WS-BPEL
Processor does not support one or more of these XPath extension
namespaces then the process definition MUST be rejected. This
requirement MUST be statically enforced."
So, I may I would take your second half of you suggestion for part (b).
--------------------------------
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other
namespaces
available. They must be understood by a WS-BPEL processor. If the
WS-BPEL Processor does not support one or more of these XPath extension
namespaces then the process definition MUST be rejected. This
requirement MUST be statically enforced.
--------------------------------
I guess the new text is simplier and preceise enough?
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
Simon D Moser wrote:
Hi all,
the intention of the sentence "The declaration [editor todo: add xref here]
does NOT cover those XPath extension functions and XPath functions of other
namespace must be always understood by WS-BPEL processor" is totally
unclear. Therefore, we propose to amend [b] in the following way:
[from]
WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension function of other namespace
available. The declaration [editor todo: add xref here] does NOT cover
those XPath extension functions and XPath functions of other namespace must
be always understood by WS-BPEL processor. If unrecognized XPath function
is used and if it is detected by static analysis, the process defintion
MUST be rejected.
[to]
A WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension functions of other namespaces
available. If XPath extensions functions of other namespaces are used, then
these namespaces MUST be
declared as WS-BPEL extension namespaces with the mustUnderstand attribute
set to "yes" (see Section 14. Extension Declarations). If a WS-BPEL
Processor does not support one or more
of these XPath extension namespaces then the process definition MUST be
rejected. This requirement MUST be statically enforced.
Cheers
/Simon
--------------------------------------------------
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
possible.
Danny van der
Rijn
<dannyv@tibco.com To
> Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com>
cc
06/21/2006 10:28 wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org, Thomas
PM Schulze/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Dieter
Koenig1/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Diane
Jordan <drj@us.ibm.com>, Peter
Furniss
<peter.furniss@erebor.co.uk>
Subject
Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 294.2 -
proposal for vote
For part [b] I would change:
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL namespace.
to read:
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL *executable*
namespace.
Alex Yiu wrote:
Hi, all,
Here is the formal proposal for vote for issue 294.2: Clarification
namespace usage in Abstract and Executable Process:
======================================
[a]
At the end of Section: "13.1.1. URI",
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process syntax is denoted under the following namespace:
urn:oasis:names:tc:wsbpel:2.0:process:abstract
--------------------------------------
add:
--------------------------------------
The Abstract Process namespace URI does not apply to <property>,
<propertyAlias> and <service-ref> elements. That means, these
elements are not declared in the Abstract Process namespace and MUST
be always identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even when
used in the context of Abstract Processes.
Similarly, any XPath function defined by this specification are
always identified with Executable Process namespace URI, even when
they are used in an expression in an Abstract Process.
--------------------------------------
[b]
Also formally incorporated the text suggested in action item #74:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=1434
After these paragraph:
--------------------------
The following XPath extension functions are defined by WS-BPEL and
MUST be supported by a WS-BPEL implementation:
· getVariableProperty, described below
· doXslTransform, described in section 8.4. Assignment
These extensions are defined in the standard WS-BPEL namespace.
--------------------------
Add clarification text on XPath extension function for other NS, as
follows:
--------------------------
WS-BPEL processor MAY make XPath extension function of other
namespace available. The declaration [editor todo: add xref here]
does NOT cover those XPath extension functions and XPath functions of
other namespace must be always understood by WS-BPEL processor. If
unrecognized XPath function is used and if it is detected by static
analysis, the process defintion MUST be rejected.
Also, the XPath extension functions, as always required by XPath
semantics, MUST not perform any side-effect operations visible to the
WS-BPEL process.
--------------------------
======================================
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates
this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|