W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-swap@w3.org > October 1998

RE: Issue: Synchronous vs. Asynch.

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:34:53 PDT
To: <ollie@opentext.com>, "Bussler, Christoph" <Christoph.Bussler@pss.boeing.com>, <gbolcer@ics.uci.edu>, <ietf-swap@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001001bdf80e$4cbe1c40$15d0000d@copper.parc.xerox.com>
Michael Oliver wrote:

> Anything is possible, but I would ask in what case is Synchronous needed?
A
> workflow between systems usually some business process, like an approval,
an
> application of data to some business process that returns results when it
> completes.
>
> To me Synchronous usually relates to real time control, a continuous data
> stream or a tightly coupled command and result, not a business workflow
> process that is a request and a response.
>
> If you can make a case for the need for Synchronous communications between
> workflow engines then please do.

We're looking at hybrid systems where there are both
manual and automated processes. The product gets ordered,
the credit card gets verified, the factory workers assemble
the product, the documentation gets printed automatically, the
package gets assembled and shipped, the credit card gets charged.

Some of the steps happen with a potentially long delay, while others
happen quickly enough to complete as a request/response.
If we can use SWAP to allow tighter integration of business processes,
it will help organizational efficiency. I'm not sure there's a clear
dividing line between 'synchronous' and 'asynchronous'; we're just
trying to decide whether the action usually happens more quickly than
the mean time between network partitioning.

Larry
--
http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
Received on Thursday, 15 October 1998 03:35:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 02:44:17 GMT