RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 103 - Moving Forward

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

So if I understand this correctly, you are proposing that we do two things with the partial resolution

1.  Allow BPEL variables of XML types/elements to be bound into XPath using the $ notation

2.  Define the BPEL context for XPath more precisely including differentiating normal vs join expressions

I certainly support 2.  I am a bit concerned about a schizophrenic resolution of variable binding.  One of the reasons I liked the $ notation was that it clearly defined the point of binding, eliminating any races (at least in my na�ve understanding of XPath) in cases of multiple occurrences of getVariableData in an expression, which is evaluated concurrently with updates to those variables.  Now we would have a split brain on this issue.

Satish

-----Original Message-----
From: Danny van der Rijn [mailto:dannyv@tibco.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 9:27 AM
Cc: wsbpeltc
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 103 - Moving Forward

+1

Alex Yiu wrote:

>
> A big +1 from me.
>
> Regards,
> Alex Yiu
>
>
> Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
>
>> Any time a proposal gets too big it can be difficult to make progress 
>> because too many issues get mixed up together. As such I propose that 
>> we break issue 103 into separate proposals, much as we did with issue 
>> 10.
>>
>> The first proposal I think should go out for a vote would be a 
>> modified version of the current 103 proposal that removes the WSDL 
>> binding to XPATH variables, keeps the getVariableData function and 
>> doesn't change the current from-specs and to-specs.
>>
>> This proposal would just include the binding of non-WSDL BPEL 
>> variables to XPATH variables along with defining the XPATH 
>> environment in which various BPEL expressions execute.
>>
>> Then when we settle exactly how we would like to model WSDL variables 
>> we can decide the future of getVariableData(), how WSDL variables 
>> will appear in XPATH (including any special forms for doc/lit), if we 
>> would like to allow properties to be bound to variables, what 
>> from-spec and to-specs we want to use, etc.
>>
>> I believe that by breaking this problem up into discrete issues we 
>> can make more rapid progress.
>>
>> What does the group think?
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>         Yaron
>>
>> 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_workgroup.php. 
>>
>>
>
>
>
> 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_workgroup.php. 
>
>
>

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_workgroup.php.