W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > May 2005

SimpleProcess, some suggestions

From: Daniel Elenius <daele@ida.liu.se>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 11:39:09 -0700
Message-ID: <428E2ECD.6050707@ida.liu.se>
To: public-sws-ig@w3.org

How about...

1) Changing the name of SimpleProcess to AbstractProcess
2) Removing the expandsTo property
3) Changing the range of realizedBy to Process

Is there any credible scenario where we want to have one atomic and one 
composite process linked to the same simple (abstract) process?

Why does it matter that they are composite/atomic?

My suggestion means there could be different degrees of abstract-ness, 
as an AbstractProcess can be (partly) realizedBy another 
AbstractProcess. The concrete process in the end of the chain (if any) 
can be either atomic or composite.

Received on Friday, 20 May 2005 18:39:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:14 UTC