W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: allowing <onentry> and <onexit> inside <final>

From: Barnett, James <James.Barnett@aspect.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 16:35:39 -0400
Message-ID: <57686697B4E28949A90094A6469165C701CEA74B@ASP1EXCH1.aspect.com>
To: <lager@ling.gu.se>
Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>, "Serge Voloshenyuk" <serge_voloshenyuk@yahoo.com>

 This is an interesting edge case.  We are currently reviewing the semantics of <final> states and will include this in our deliberations.  

- Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Torbjörn Lager [mailto:torbjorn.lager@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 4:31 PM
To: Barnett, James
Cc: www-voice@w3.org; Serge Voloshenyuk
Subject: Re: allowing <onentry> and <onexit> inside <final>

I think that this is a good idea. But what about the <onexit> children
of a <final> which is a child of <scxml>? Will they ever be run? Is
the concept of 'exiting' applicable to this state?


On 4/5/07, Barnett, James <James.Barnett@aspect.com> wrote:
> We have provisionally decided to accept the following change request for
> inclusion in the next draft of the spec.  The <final> element will be
> allowed to have <onentry> and <onexit> children:
>   From Serge Voloshenyuk:
> Hi
> It could be useful to have <onentry> and <onexit> in <final> state.
> <onentry>: for send results
> <onexit>: for data cleanups.
> Regards, Serge.
Received on Thursday, 5 April 2007 20:35:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:39 UTC