← Prev in month ← Prev in thread

Re: [wsbpel] Issue 191 - Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from withinWhile loop (New Proposed Issue Announcement)

From
Danny van der Rijn <>
Date
2005-02-05T00:17:37+00:00
ID
Thread
Re: [wsbpel] Issue 191 - Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from withinWhile loop (New Proposed Issue Announcement)
Title: Message

I must have formatted my mail to Tony incorrectly.  The example should
read:

<process>

    <sequence>

       <while>

          <receive createInstance="yes">

             <correlations>

                <correlation initiate="rendezvous"/>

             </correlations>

          </receive>

       </while>

       ...

    </sequence>

</process>

Tony Fletcher wrote:

  
  
  
  
This issue has been
added to the wsbpel issue list with a status of "received". The status
will be changed to "open" if the TC accepts it as identifying a bug in
the spec or decides it should be accepted specially. Otherwise it will
be closed without further consideration (but will be marked as
"Revisitable") 

  

  

  

  
The issues list is posted as a Technical
Committee document to the OASIS WSBPEL TC pages on a regular basis. The current edition, as a
TC document, is the most recent version of the document entitled in the
"Issues" folder of the WSBPEL TC document list - the next posting as a TC document will
include this issue. The list editor's working copy, which will normally
include an issue when it is announced, is available at this constant URL.   

  

  

  
  
  
  Issue
191: Receive/createProcess/Rendezvous from within While loop
  
Status: received

  Date added: 4 Feb 2005

  Categories: Correlation

  Date submitted: 4 February 2005

  Submitter: Danny van der
Rijn

  Description: We came across the following edge case: 

  
<process> <sequence> 

  
<while> <receive
createInstance="yes"> <correlations> <correlation
initiate="rendezvous"/> </correlations> </receive>
<while> ... </sequence> </process> 

  
in which an initial receive correlates
with itself in a while loop. It appears to be valid from a syntactical
point of view, and the execution semantics would follow naturally from
the specification. 

  
Submitter's proposal: None other
than to ask the question: should it explicitly be disallowed?

  
Changes: 4 Feb 2005 - new issue

  
  
 Best
Regards,

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
Tony                          
  

  
    
      

        
        

        
        
        
Tony
Fletcher

        
Technical
Advisor 

        Choreology
Ltd.

68, Lombard Street, London EC3V 9L J   UK

        
      

      

        
        
Phone:  

        
        
        
+44 (0)
1473 729537

        
      

      

        
        
Mobile: 

        
        
        
+44 (0)
7801 948219

        
      

      

        
        
Fax:    

        
        
        
+44 (0)
870 7390077

        
      

      

        
        
Web:

        
        
        
www.choreology.com

        
      

      

        
        
Cohesions™

        
      

      

        
        
Business
transaction management software for application coordination

        
      

      

        
        
 Work:
 

        
      

      

        
        
Home: 
← Prev in month ← Prev in thread