- From: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@alcatel-lucent.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:27:25 -0700
- To: "Giuseppe Attardi" <attardi@di.unipi.it>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Professor Attardi, You are right, that is an inconsistency. We prefer to keep the current language definition (transition not allowed as child of scxml) and change the example. In the next draft we will put a single wrapper state as a child of scxml to contain the transitions. - Jim -----Original Message----- From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Giuseppe Attardi Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:45 AM To: www-voice@w3.org Subject: http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/ There is an inconsistency in this version of the document. Earlier versions allowed <transition> as a child of element <scxml> and in the calculator example (http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#N11844) this is still used to represent transitions that are applicable to any state. Hence either the example should be changed or <transition> allowed again within <scxml>. Regards prof. Giuseppe Attardi Università di Pisa ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Wednesday, 14 September 2011 18:29:08 UTC