W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2007

SCXML: B.1 undefined behavior in algorithm

From: Serge Voloshenyuk <serge_voloshenyuk@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:24:27 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20070222022427.59970.qmail@web34314.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: www-voice@w3.org

  <parallel id="P">
    <state id="P1">
      <transition cond="cond" target="P2"/>
    </state>
    <state id="P2"/>
  </parallel>
 Maybe you think by graphical notation for state machine.
 But  Harel used set arithmetics for compound states.
 I mean tree of compound states must be treated as flat set of leaf states.
 And transition as changing of current state.
 Compound state is just syntax sugar for generalization of OR or AND union of state subset.
 And transition is not arrow which has source and destination.
 But just assignment of new value to current machine state.
  
 So, in this example:
 Initial state is
   P1.currentleafsubstate AND P2.curentleafsubstate
 Final state is
   P1.currentleafsubstate AND P2.initial
 
 Semantically this transition means:
   if ( in(P1) and cond ) state = (P1.currentleafsubstate AND P2.initial);
   (P1.currentleafsubstate AND P2.curentleafsubstate)->(P1.currentleafsubstate AND P2.initial)

 P2 is reentered.
  But P1 and P aren't.  
  
  in(P1) == in(P1) and in(P2) == in(P) == in(P2)
  It's not important in what state transition is declared as soon as actions are absent.

P1.currentleafsubstate is because P1 is absent in target expression. Analogies:
S->P == S->(P1.initial and P2.initial)
S->P11 == S->(P11 and P2.initial)
P11->P12 == (P11 and P2.cur)->(P12 and P2.cur)



 
---------------------------------
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2007 02:24:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 February 2007 02:24:51 GMT