I have few initial concerns after looking over the excellent
documentation and examples on the Commons SCXML site.
So far, my concerns are as follows:
1.) I'm not wild about having to run an XSL transform on dialogs
during compile time but the SCXML approach to configuring dialogs
seems to
On 8/25/06, Sean Schofield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have few initial concerns after looking over the excellent
documentation and examples on the Commons SCXML site.
So far, my concerns are as follows:
1.) I'm not wild about having to run an XSL transform on dialogs
during compile time but
On 8/25/06, Sean Schofield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have few initial concerns after looking over the excellent
documentation and examples on the Commons SCXML site.
So far, my concerns are as follows:
1.) I'm not wild about having to run an XSL transform on dialogs
during compile time
snip/
I'd like Shale to support both the current dialog notation and SCXML
as stated here [1], and both can use the same underlying engine. The
current dialog notation by virtue of being the incumbent, and SCXML
because:
* SCXML is a well-defined distillation of all variants of state
machine theory.
