Re: Shocked by new SCXML Draft

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Stefan Maton <maton@sidema.be> wrote:
>
> -          Decouple Ecmascript and SCXML: Looking at the different
> conditions and expressions that can be embedded within the scxml, there is
> no real need to force the SCXML standard to use Ecmascript. In fact any
> expression parser which can handle normal and boolean expressions and which
> can hold a set of data is ok. The only specification you need to give is the
> way the data is represented when attaching it as a namelist in <send> or as
> a return value when a expr is evaluated within an <assign>. By decoupling
> Ecmascript and SCXML (and implicitly XPath) the draft would be much more
> flexible since not only targeted at the java platform.

Speaking as someone who is only aware of SCXML as a potential
successor to CCXML,
which is a context that rightly does not include ecmascript, letting
the VXML portions of
a complex system handle them, I agree with what Mr. Maton has said.
Perhaps declaring
JSON as the marshalling protocol for data objects or another very
restricted by well defined
subset of ECMAscript -- perhaps requiring ECMA-327
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma-327.pdf
instead of full ECMA-262.

Received on Friday, 23 May 2008 15:43:57 UTC