Sid and Yaron,
My main concern with my own proposal is the fact that the default
behavior cannot be achieved with custom handlers, which is a fault in my
proposal. Someone (cannot recall who) brought that up during the face
to face and it gave me pause. Need to think about that some more. In
the mean while let us wait for Peter's comments.
Satish
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaron Goland [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:42 PM
To: 'Sid Askary';
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Resolution to issue 10 - Implicit compensation
Handler
+1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sid Askary [mailto:]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 1:46 PM
> To:
> Subject: [wsbpel] Resolution to issue 10 - Implicit
> compensation Handler
>
>
> Satish,
> As I said, I think your solution (the reverse temporal order)
> is a good one. I think I have a simple compromise: that we
> add a sentence to the effect that
>
> " Note: Sole reliance on implicit compensation handlers as a
> programming construct or as a means of defining default
> system behavior is not recommended."
>
> This may address both the "programmatic" (Yaron's) and
> default behavior (my own) assumptions.
>
> Not sure about Peter's concern.
>
> - Sid.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from
> the roster of the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/le
> ave_workgroup.php.
>
>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr
oup.php.
