RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 130 - Proposal for vote

Paco
                                                                                                                                     
From: Danny van der Rijn <>                     
To: wsbpeltc <>                                         
Subject:  Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 130 - Proposal for vote                                   
Date: 12/20/2004 05:34 PM                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                        
While partners have no syntactic or semantic value in either abstract or
executable BPEL (nor have they ever), they still retain semantic meaning
at the modeling level.  I don't actually recall a discussion about
removing them, but I'm somewhat ambivalent about doing so, and wonder
what others think on the issue.

Danny

Yaron Y. Goland wrote:

> I had previously moved that we remove partners (not partnerLinks) from
> the BPEL specification. I had been asked to table that proposal until
> we had a better understanding of what role partners might play in
> abstract processes. At the F2F the general consensus was that we now
> have a good enough understanding of what abstract processes are likely
> to look like in BPEL that we can safely conclude that partners will
> not play a significant role. Therefore I was asked to re-raise my
> original proposal.
>
> I therefore move that we remove partners from the BPEL specification.
>
>     Thanks,
>
>         Yaron