W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > October to December 2011

RE: SCXML entry order

From: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 07:02:37 -0800
Message-ID: <E17CAD772E76C742B645BD4DC602CD810580482E@NAHALD.us.int.genesyslab.com>
To: "Carlos Verdes" <cverdes@gmail.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Carlos,

  After discussion within the working group, we would like to clarify
that entry order is the same as document order.  The order of
invocations would be the same (so: P-->S1-->S11-->S2-->S21-->S3-->S31).


 

Jim

From: Carlos Verdes [mailto:cverdes@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:54 PM
To: Jim Barnett; www-voice@w3.org
Subject: SCXML entry order

 

Hi Jim,

 

I'm trying to implement SCXML in Java, and is crazy that I started with
this because I used to work for CSC with people from Alcatel and their
state machine oriented platform for intelligent networking.

 

Now I have a simple question about entry order I hope you could answer.

 

If we have the state machine:

<parallel id="P">

    <state id="S1">

        <state id="S11"/>

        <state id="S12"/>

    </state>

    <state id="S2">

        <state id="S21"/>

        <state id="S22"/>

         <transition event="e" target="S22" />

    </state>

    <state id="S3">

        <state id="S31"/>

        <state id="S32"/>

    </state>

      <transition event="e" target="S32" type="internal"/>

</parallel>

 

Which should be the entry order?

 

If I interprets ancestors before I should do like:

P-->S1-->S2-->S3-->S11-->S21--S31

 

But for me it has more sense:

P-->S1-->S11-->S2-->S21-->S3-->S31

 

Which is the same as document order... which is the proper one?

 

 

And I have another question about this part of the algorithm


procedure enterStates(enabledTransitions)


...

for s in statesToEnter:
        statesToInvoke.add(s)
statesToEnter = statesToEnter.toList().sort(enterOrder)

 

When we add states in statesToInvoke we are not following any concrete
order, however statesToEnter is an ordered set.

Should be this order the document order, or insertion order in states to
enter?

 

To put an example with the previous configuration
[P,S1,S11,S2,S21,S3,S31], event e occur:

---------------------

atomicStates [S11,S21,S31]

S11 has no transition, go to parent S1, no transitions, parent P enables
transition P-->S32

S2 enables transition S2-->S21

enabledTransitions[P-->S32, S2-->S21]

 

---------------------

transition1: P-->S32 internal

ancestor-->P (t.source)

statesToEnter [S32]

 

getProperAncestors(S32) -->[S3]

statesToEnter[S32,S3]

 

S3 is not parallel --> next transition

 

---------------------

transition 2: S2-->S21

ancestor --> P (LCA)

statesToEnter[S32,S3,S21,S2]

 

-----------------------------------

And do for s in statesToEnter:

 
        statesToInvoke.add(s)
statesToEnter = statesToEnter.toList().sort(enterOrder)
 

So 

statesToInvoke[S32,S3,S21,S2]

statesToEnter[S2,S3,S21,S22] or [S2,S21,S3,S31]

 

 

 

Could you please give me some light on this scenario please?

 

Regards,

Carlos Verdes.


					
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files attached may contain confidential and proprietary information of Alcatel-Lucent and/or its affiliated entities. Access by the intended recipient only is authorized. Any liability arising from any party acting, or refraining from acting, on any information contained in this e-mail is hereby excluded. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, destroy the original transmission and its attachments and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Copyright in this e-mail and any attachments belongs to Alcatel-Lucent and/or its affiliated entities.
					
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 15:03:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 8 December 2011 15:03:16 GMT