I reviewed the issue 10 text (btw, there is exactly 0% chance that any
normal implementer will understand what is said there, we need to figure
out how to massage the text to make it readable by normal programmers
who haven't cracked open their college textbooks in a decade or more)
and I agree that it makes issue 108 redundant. We should close 108 as no
change to the spec.
Yaron
Satish Thatte wrote:
> Yaron,
>
> As a result of incorporating 10, I believe 108 is now redundant. Do you agree?
>
> Also, as soon as 168 is resolved we should revisit 81 and 120.
>
> Satish
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Satish Thatte
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:14 PM
> *To:* 'bpel spec'
> *Cc:* 'Furniss, Peter'
> *Subject:* passing the pen to Assaf
>
> I have done two checkins, yesterday and today, for issues 10, 98, 135 and 176.
>
> Assaf, the pen is yours.
>
> Peter, please mark those issues as being incorporated in the spec.
>
> Satish
>
>
>
