<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4"
          urlbase="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/"
          
          maintainer="sysbot+bugzilla@w3.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>1027</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2005-01-20 20:17:25 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>Question on constraint - Section 2.3.4, 2nd last paragraph, 1st sentence</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2005-08-03 15:46:32 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>WS Choreography</product>
          <component>Last Call Comment: Confirmed Closed</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>PC</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>CLOSED</bug_status>
          <resolution>WONTFIX</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005Jan/0022.html</bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>--</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Greg Ritzinger">gritzinger</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</assigned_to>
          
          
          <qa_contact name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>2846</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Greg Ritzinger">gritzinger</who>
    <bug_when>2005-01-20 20:17:25 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Section 2.3.4, 2nd last paragraph, 1st sentence.   
   Question on constraint   
   &quot;If two or more Channel Types SHOULD point to Role Types that MUST be
implemented by the same logical entity or organization, then the specified Role
Types MUST belong to the same Participant Type.&quot;   
   This restriction means that if channel type is present in an organization,
then only one participant type is allowed.   
   What is the reason for this restriction?   
   It would be reasonable to expect an organization to be more than one
Participant Type.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>2894</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</who>
    <bug_when>2005-01-25 20:50:21 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>requires discussion</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>4184</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</who>
    <bug_when>2005-02-14 21:04:04 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>From meeting on 25-jan-05:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jan/att-0010/2005-01-
25_WS-Chor_Notes.txt

Requires technical discussion.
</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>4016</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</who>
    <bug_when>2005-03-08 10:35:27 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Discussed at the feb/march 05 F2F:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Mar/att-
0001/Ws_Chor_f2f__Feb-Mar_2005_-0.txt


&lt;
The restriction is valid because it makes no sense to have an organisation play 
two participants. This does not mean an organisation cannot have two 
participants 
in reality it just means that they are siloed. That is they are separate and 
not 
logically connected. So this delineates responsibilities within the logical 
participants in a CDL description. Therefore by definition it is correct and 
not 
further action is required to resolve this issue. 
There is no way, by definition, that a channel at one participant can point to 
the 
same thing in another. They cannot be the same channel because they are 
physically separate entities. 
Agreed that issue is therefore RESOLVED WON&apos;T FIX. 


&lt;scribe&gt; ACTION: Add text in primer or spec to clarify above. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2005/02/28-ws-chor-irc] 
</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>3434</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</who>
    <bug_when>2005-05-10 15:52:52 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Yin-Leng has been informed of the group&apos;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/0013.html</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>3257</commentid>
    <comment_count>5</comment_count>
    <who name="Steve Ross-Talbot">steve</who>
    <bug_when>2005-05-16 14:13:50 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Added to primer now that it is CLOSED - SRT
QA contact changed from Martin to Steve (as primer main author)</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>5355</commentid>
    <comment_count>6</comment_count>
    <who name="Martin Chapman">martin.chapman</who>
    <bug_when>2005-08-03 15:46:32 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Yin-Leng has confirmed the resolution is acceptable:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005Aug/0020.html</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>