RE: [wsbpel] New issue - ASSERT activity.

["Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>]

Am I correct in understanding that this is a macro for (using the old
syntax)

<switch>
   <case condition="precondition-xpath-expression">
       <terminate/>
   </case>
</switch
<any-activity>
<switch>
   <case condition="postcondition-xpath-expression">
       <terminate/>
   </case>
</switch>

Or did you have something else in mind?  How would you interpret the
pre/post conditions in abstract processes?

Satish

-----Original Message-----
From: Maciej Szefler [mailto:mbs@fivesight.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 4:17 PM
To: peter.furniss@choreology.com; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsbpel] New issue - ASSERT activity.


I'd like to propose the addition of an assertion facility to the BPEL 
language. Specifically I'd like to see <precondition> and
<postcondition> 
elements added to the list of standard elements, something along the
lines 
of:
  <any-activity>
     <precondition>
	    <expression language="XPath">
	       some-xpath-expression
	    </expression>
     </precondition>
     <postcondition>
	    <expression language="XPath">
	       some-xpath-expression
	    </expression>
     </postcondition>

	....

  </any-activity>

Interpetation of the <pre-/post-condition> elements would be optional,
but 
if assertions are enabled the expressions must evaluate to "true" or
else 
the process instance is immediately terminated (ala <terminate>). 
Assertions would be available to both executable and abstract processes.

-standard argument for assertions goes here-.

-maciej

-- 
Maciej Szefler [mbs(a)fivesight.com] [+1-312-432-0556x226]

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.