Dims/Paul,

Thanks, I have the PXE source and will take a look to see if the bpel-parser
+ bom would make sense to reuse.

I would like to try and steer this discussion back to my original question
on defining a common set of BPEL acceptance tests. Do you think this sounds
like a reasonable thing to achieve? I noticed there are BPEL documents
located at ( pxe\bpel-scripts\src1.1\good and pxe\bpel-scripts\src\2.0\good
). Do you consider these the PXE acceptance tests? The Sybase donation has
BPEL test documents located at ( bpe\bpelTests ). Does it make sense to
start by merging these two groups of  tests?

Lance

On 2/21/06, Paul Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi, Lance --
>
> > At this point, I think I used the term "parser" a bit too generically. I
> > should have used the term "translator".
>
> Then you'd want bpel-parser + bom. :)
>
> The bpel-parser module is a SAX-only, grammar-based approach to
> parsing both dialects of BPEL and mapping them to a normalized object
> model that contains the necessary information for both 1.1 and 2.0.
> The current tool chain within PXE is something like this:
>
> text -[xml parser]-> SAX -[bpel-parser]-> BOM -[bpel-compiler]-> O-model
>
> And the O-model is what's used to generate the "byte code" for the PXE
> PVM at runtime.  The bpel-compiler contains most of the static
> analysis logic and enforcement, while the parser is based on the BPEL
> grammar but not according to the schema, since XML Schema doesn't
> capture a good number of the semantics needed.  (Non-deterministic
> content model blah blah.)
>
> I'll go on record as stating that I don't think that having one engine
> makes sense as a goal, but I do think that it makes sense to have an
> emphasis, as a collective, on generating independently useful
> artifacts from each engine effort, e.g., parsing and static analysis.
>
> We can start with the notion of having a Crimson and a Xerces, which
> is appropriate if you think about how the two parsers were originally
> conceived (SUN/IBM, different implementation approaches) and donated
> to Apache.
>
> Cheers.
>
> -- Paul
>

Reply via email to