Re: [wsbpel] Issue - R10 - Definition of IMA scope - Proposal forVote

Hi all,

Danny and I worked together to come up with a more detailed/consistent
wording changes proposal for Issue R10. 

Here is my proposal: (hopefully it is good enough to capture what Danny
prefers). 

In section 10.4.1: 

From:

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

If a <reply> activity
cannot be associated with an open IMA
by matching the tuple partnerLink, operation, and messageExchange then a
WS-BPEL
processor MUST throw a bpel:missingRequest fault on the
<reply> activity.
Since conflicting requests are
rejected at the time the IMA begins execution there cannot be more than
one
corresponding IMA at the time a <reply> activity is
executed.  Further if an open
IMA goes out of scope prior to being closed by a <reply> activity then
the scope MUST throw the standard fault bpel:missingReply. A scope which
declares a partnerLink or messageExchange used by an IMA will not complete normally
if that IMA is open when the
scope tries to complete. Accordingly if a process instance
completes,
with one or more open IMAs, then a bpel:missingReply fault MUST be thrown (see
section 12. Scopes for other details of bpel:missingReply).

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

To:

(Note:

  
new text is coded in GREEN.

  
I do not use any normative wordings in new green sentences to
avoid any duplication of normative text in the spec)

Replace from "Further" with summary version of 12.2, retain the new
last
sentence or :

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

If a <reply> activity
cannot be associated with an open IMA
by matching the tuple partnerLink, operation, and messageExchange then a
WS-BPEL
processor MUST throw a bpel:missingRequest fault on the
<reply> activity.
Since conflicting requests are
rejected at the time the IMA begins execution there cannot be more than
one
corresponding IMA at the time a <reply> activity is
executed.  

[New Paragraph]

When the primary activity and the
event handlers of a <scope> complete then all Web service interactions
dependent on partner links or message exchanges declared inside of the <scope> need to be completed. An open IMA using a partner link
or message exchange declared in a completing or completed <scope> is termed as an orphaned IMA. Detection of orphaned IMA's will
cause a bpel:missingReply fault to be thrown.
Orphaned IMA's are defined
and
discussed in further detail in section  REF _Ref136685846 \h 12.2 Message Exchange
Handling. Accordingly
if a process instance completes,
with one or more open IMAs, then a bpel:missingReply
fault MUST be thrown as well.  

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

Thanks!

Regards,

Alex Yiu

ws-bpel issues list editor wrote:

  
This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list with a status
of "received".
The status will be changed to "open" if a motion to open the issue is
proposed and that
motion is approved by the TC. A motion could also be proposed to close
it without
further consideration. Otherwise it will remain as "received".
  

  
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 - R10 - Definition of IMA scope
  Status: received

  Date added: 19 Sep 2006

  Date submitted: 18 September 2006

  Submitter: Alex Yiu

  Description:
  
I would like to request to open a review issue to improve the ease
of understanding of the spec. The discussion was under the thread of
subject: "A possible issue concerning the definition of IMA scope"
started by Ron Ten-Hove.
  

  
If the issue is passed, we would just need to refine some
cross-referencing of terms and bookmark.

  Submitter's proposal: 

  
Besides 10.4.1, another relevant part of IMA and message exchange
handling is in section 12.2:
  

  12.2. Message Exchange Handling
    
When the primary activity and the event handlers of a
<scope> complete then all Web service interactions dependent on
partner links or message exchanges declared inside of the <scope>
need to be completed. An orphaned IMA occurs when an IMA using a
partner link or message exchange, declared in the completing
<scope> or its descendants, remains open. .... 

  
  

I would suggest to do a brief update in 10.1.4
from:
  

  Further if an open IMA goes out of scope prior to being
closed 
to:
  Further if an open IMA goes out of scope (known as an
orphaned IMA) prior to being closed 
from:
  (see section 12. Scopes for other details of
bpel:missingReply).
  
to:
  (see section 12.2 Message Exchange Handling for other
details of bpel:missingReply and orphaned IMA).
  
  

  Links: Ron
Ten-Hove, 23 Aug 2006     Danny
van der Rijn, 23 Aug 2006     Alex
Yiu, 23 Aug 2006     Monica
J. Martin, 23 Aug 2006

  Changes: 19 Sep 2006 - new issue

  
  
To comment on this issue (including whether it should be
accepted), please follow-up to this announcement on the
 list (replying to this message should
automatically send your message to that list), or ensure
the subject line as you send it starts "Issue - R10 -
[anything]" or is a reply
to such a message. If you want to formally propose a resolution to an
open issue, please start the subject line "Issue - R10 - Proposed
resolution", without any Re: or similar.
  

  
To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document