- 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>
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:22:25 UTC
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. Cheers, Martin. -----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 the >exception handling and finalizer mechanisms in more detail recently, I think >the naming of the 'finalizer' leads to confusion in relationship to the >commonly understood semantics of a Java 'finally' block in relation to java >exception handling (i.e. the closeness of the terms tends to implies that >the work inside the finalizer block will be performed regardless of whether >the choreo completes normally or with an exception). Possibly it should be >renamed 'compensation'? +1 Being a Java programmer, I agree that the CDL semantics here may be misunderstood, and that "compensation" would be a better term to use. Greg
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:22:25 UTC