W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: Qry : SCXML Issues ?

From: Barnett, James <James.Barnett@aspect.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:30:11 -0500
Message-ID: <CDB88C76D4D72244973F442A5305F0F94ABE2E@BOS1EXCH1.aspect.com>
To: <raxit@phonologies.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>

Raxit,
  On issue 1, there is no contradiction between the two assertions:  the
parallel states in question must be atomic.  That is, there is a
<parallel> tag, with two or more <state> children.  Those children are
themselves may be complex states, but if they are, they have atomic
descendants.  The <invoke> tag must occur in those atomic descendants.
But now that I think about it, our phrasing is poor:  when we say "
invoke> is incompatible with the <state> and <parallel> elements" we
mean that a given state may have  <state> children, a <parallel> child,
or an <invoke> child, but no combinations are allowed. In other words,
<invoke>, <parallel> and <state> may not be siblings.  <invoke> may
occur _inside_ a <parallel> element or nested <state> element.  We will
make this clearer in a future draft. 

On issue 2, you are right.  States must have IDs and allowing them to be
omitted by the author is just a convenience - the platform must assign
them in such a case.  We will make this sort of detail more explicit in
future drafts of the specification.

- Jim 

-----Original Message-----
From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of raxit@phonologies.com
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 1:09 AM
To: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Qry : SCXML Issues ?


Reference SCXML Draft : 2006-01-24
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-scxml-20060124/



Issue 1:

As per the 4.4.2
"<invoke> is incompatible with the <state> and <parallel> elements. It 
may thus occur only in atomic states, namely those which do not have 
substates."

Conficting with 4.4  
"For the niceties of the semantics of <invoke>, consider the case when 
parallel states invoke the same external service concurrently."




Issue 2 : ID attribute of <state>

As per 4.4
"They can be distingused by the states' "id" which is passed with the 
invocation. Similarly, the "id" contained in the events returned from 
the external services can be used to determine which events are 
responses to which invocation."

what if the <state> is not having ID. ?  (As per the 3.2.1 and 3.4.1  ID

is not required attribute)


 From the platform implementation point of View Each state must have 
Valid (and unique) ID (as per the scope semantics),

However  when SCXML Application  not having  id attribute of <state> ,  
platform should be  responsible for generating (and maintaining) 
Valid-Unique ID.  Not having ID attribute is only for ease of SCXML 
application developer.


Waiting for response...


Thanking you,


Regards
Raxit Sheth

-- 

Raxit Sheth
Systems Software Engineer
Raxit@Phonologies.com

***********************
Please note our new Address.
***********************
Phonologies (India) Private Limited
17/18 Metro House, Colaba Causeway,
Mumbai 400001. INDIA.
Ph:+91-22-22029732 / 36   Fax:+91-22-22029728

Info@Phonologies.COM
http://www.phonologies.com

****The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this
email by
anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be
taken
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful****
Received on Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:28:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:49:01 GMT