Issue - 111 - Syntax Choices for Extension Activity (Web Ballot)

Hi all,

Here is the details of the web ballot (proposed) for Extension Activity
Syntax. 

The
web-ballot is NORMATIVE. That is, a binding vote
on a partial solution for 111 which would then constrain the remaining
completion of the resolution. Similar to what we did with 82 where we
approved a partial solution that set a direction and filled in the
details later with a vote on the additions.

In short, we shall finish the actual proposal for Issue
111 to vote based on the result of this web-ballot. 

(I hope the color scheme make it easier for comparision) 

Option #1: moving the extension to wrapper to generic extension
points (<extendedBy>)

-----------------------------

<sequence>

    <extendedBy>

        <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz"
/> 

    </extendedBy>

    ... 

    <invoke
name="myInvoke"

                 
foo:activityExtension2="abc"

                 
operation="op1" ...>

        <extendedBy>

            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

        </extendedBy>

        <targets> ... </targets>

        <sources> ... </sources>

    </invoke>

    <bar:myInvoke
name="myExtendedInvoke"

                 
foo:activityExtension2="abc"

                 
operation="op1" ...>

        <extendedBy>

            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

        </extendedBy>

        <targets> ... </targets>

        <sources> ... </sources>

    </bar:myInvoke>

</sequence> 

-----------------------------

Related to:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsbpel/200503/msg00040.html

Option #2: Using <extensibleActivityWrapper> and having
all
standard attribute and elements and generic extension points (both attr
and elem) local to the extended activity element itself (i.e.
<bar:myInvoke>).

-----------------------------

<sequence>

    <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz"
/> 

    ... 

    <invoke
name="myInvoke"

                     
foo:activityExtension2="abc"

                     
operation="op1" ...>

            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

            <targets>
... </targets> 

            <sources>
... </sources>

    </invoke>

    <extensibleActivityWrapper>

        <bar:myInvoke
name="myExtendedInvoke"

                     
foo:activityExtension2="abc"

                     
operation="op1" ...>

            <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

            <targets>
... </targets> 

            <sources>
... </sources>

        </bar:myInvoke>

    </extensibleActivityWrapper>

</sequence> 

-----------------------------

Option #3: Using <extensibleActivityWrapper> and having
all
standard attribute and elements and generic extension attr on the
wrapper,
but having  generic extension element local to the extended activity
element itself (i.e. <bar:myInvoke>) 

-----------------------------

<sequence>

    <foo:sequenceExtension1="xyz"
/> 

    ... 

    <invoke
name="myInvoke"

                 
foo:activityExtension2="abc"

                 
operation="op1" ...>

        <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

        <targets> ... </targets>

        <sources> ... </sources>

    </invoke>

    <extensibleActivityWrapper
name="myExtendedInvoke"

                              
foo:activityExtension2="abc">

        <targets> ... </targets>

        <sources> ... </sources>

        <bar:myInvoke
operation="op1" ...>

           <foo:activityExtension3>def</foo:activityExtension3>

        </bar:myInvoke>

    </extensibleActivityWrapper>

</sequence> 

-----------------------------

Option #4: Other: 

Please state your alternative opinion. E.g.: you can simply state
your position, if you don't support extension activity in general in
BPEL.

Thanks so much!!!

Regards,

Alex Yiu