W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Feedback on Glossary

From: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:09:19 -0700
Message-ID: <3EA72B2F.6090306@intalio.com>
To: "Cummins, Fred A" <fred.cummins@eds.com>
CC: "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org

>
>
>This seems like a rather imprecise definition.  How do you 
>expect to use "service type?"  If it is used within a choreography
>specification, I would expect it to refer to a WSDL interface, or
>something more specific, such as a real estate seller using a 
>seller interface.
>  
>
>Fred
>
I agree. I think the choreography specification should refer to WSDL 
interfaces. But that's just a means to achieve some goal, I don't think 
it describes the goal.

Let's say that we only care about using WSDL artifacts when expressing 
choreography. WSDL has interfaces so a choreography could use WSDL 
interface if nothing else than to justify their existence. It could also 
use WSDL services directly. Why one and not the other?

If you want to define a choreography once and then use that definition 
with any combination of applicable services you need to define it not 
based on specific services, but rather in terms of more generic service 
types. Using WSDL interfaces is in my opinion the only interesting way 
to achieve this goal. But if my goal was to write the choreography in 
terms of services, not service types, I would probably not be using WSDL 
interfaces.

What I need is that generic concept that allows me to rationalize why 
the choreography should be expressed using WSDL interfaces. The term 
role is an alternative, but in my opinion overloaded. It also makes it 
easier to write use cases using this more generic term. As a buyer my 
business requirement is to be able to use any entity offering a service 
that implements the generic seller service type. Using WSDL interfaces 
is technically interesting but not a business objective.

arkin
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 22:14:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:58 UTC