W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > November 2004

RE: Coordinated Choreographies Proposal 4 - Finalize Activity

From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:22:44 -0000
To: "'Greg Ritzinger'" <gritzinger@novell.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004e01c4c353$aef4d7c0$0901a8c0@ie.oracle.com>
For these terminology issues we should spend at most 5 mins. If we
cannot get agreement in that time, we should list as an issue at the
back of the last call document.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Greg Ritzinger
Sent: 04 November 2004 20:04
To: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Subject: Re: Coordinated Choreographies Proposal 4 - Finalize Activity

>Related note: After studying the Choreology proposals and looking into
>exception handling and finalizer mechanisms in more detail recently, I
>the naming of the 'finalizer' leads to confusion in relationship to the
>commonly understood semantics of a Java 'finally' block in relation to
>exception handling (i.e. the closeness of the terms tends to implies
>the work inside the finalizer block will be performed regardless of
>the choreo completes normally or with an exception). Possibly it should
>renamed 'compensation'? 
Being a Java programmer, I agree that the CDL semantics here may be
misunderstood, and that "compensation" would be a better term to use.

Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:22:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:06 UTC