This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 1002 - RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELATIONSHIP TYPES
Summary: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELATIONSHIP TYPES
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: WS Choreography
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Last Call Comment: Confirmed Closed (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: --
Assignee: Martin Chapman
QA Contact: Martin Chapman
URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/p...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-01-10 16:01 UTC by Martin Chapman
Modified: 2005-05-10 15:01 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Martin Chapman 2005-01-10 16:01:46 UTC
There is no contraints indicating how relationships in enclosed and
enclosing choreographies are related - should there atleast be a
constraint that the two choreographies must share atleast one common
relationship type?

Regards

Gary and Steve
Comment 1 Martin Chapman 2005-02-14 20:36:47 UTC
From meeting on 11-jan-05
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jan/att-0002/2005-01-
11_WS-Chor_Notes.txt:

Discussion deferred as deemed to be a technical issue.

Comment 2 Greg Ritzinger 2005-03-22 19:03:51 UTC
Proposal from Gary Brown:

Although I have asked Kohei for clarification on this, I actually think the text
in the issue is pretty clear: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1102.

"Cannot see why finalizer blocks etc. should not combine in them corresponding 
workunits --- the latter seem rather redundant in semantics (and examples). 
As far as I read, no repetition etc. seems possible in these blocks."

He is saying why is only a workunit permitted inside a finalizerBlock? I can see
no valid reason for this restriction, so I propose that we change this to be an
'activity'.

The only changes I can see are in section 2.4.5:

1) Syntax to change from

<finalizerBlock name="ncname" >
    WorkUnit-Notation
</finalizerBlock>

to

<finalizerBlock name="ncname" >
      Activity-Notation
</finalizerBlock>

2) Last paragraph in that section - suggested change would be to remove the
sentence that talks about the workunit.

3) Obviously the schema would need to be updated


The examples in 2.4.10 could be updated, but they are still valid using workunits.


Regards
Gary

Comment 3 Greg Ritzinger 2005-03-22 19:04:45 UTC
URL for previous comment:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Mar/0035.html
Comment 4 Greg Ritzinger 2005-03-29 20:34:55 UTC
Comments #2 and #3 DO NOT apply to this bug. They apply to bug 1102.
Comment 5 Greg Ritzinger 2005-03-29 20:57:08 UTC
Discussed on March 29, 2005 conference call.
Comment 6 Martin Chapman 2005-05-10 14:47:56 UTC
Steveand Gary have been informed of the group's decision [1] and we are 
awaiting 
confirmation. Category changed to LCC: Closed.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-
comments/2005May/0008.html
Comment 7 Martin Chapman 2005-05-10 14:59:38 UTC
Steveand Gary have been informed of the group's decision [1] and we are 
awaiting 
confirmation. Category changed to LCC: Closed.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-
comments/2005May/0008.html
Comment 8 Martin Chapman 2005-05-10 15:01:52 UTC
Issue raiser has confirmed the resolution:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005May/0009.html