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

Re: Revised: Mission Statement

From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:51:55 -0700
Cc: Nickolas Kavantzas <nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com>, "Cummins, Fred A" <fred.cummins@eds.com>, Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>, "Yaron Y. Goland" <ygoland@bea.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
To: Steve <steve@enigmatec.net>
Message-Id: <657B12F8-ACD7-11D7-8C30-000393A3327C@fla.fujitsu.com>

+1
Frank

On Wednesday, July 2, 2003, at 02:57  AM, Steve wrote:

>
> Given the heated discussion last night I must concur fully with Nick. 
> Furthermore I think the correct approach is to take the work done at 
> the F2F as the mission statement for this group and revisit it as and 
> when we need to. We can add additional paragraphs clarifying the terms 
> used (like semantics) and we can clarify the approach we are taking 
> (i.e. being fairly practical and being delivery focussed on behalf of 
> users of this technology and vendors who will build products based on 
> this technology).
>
> I humbly suggest that the mission statement  from the F2F is *only* 
> tidied up and then put into the requirements document.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve T
>
> On Wednesday, July 2, 2003, at 03:40  am, Nickolas Kavantzas wrote:
>
>>
>> During the Chicago F2F, the W3C Choreography Group agreed and later 
>> presented to the BPEL TC chairs its mission statement.
>> This statement was presented by the BPEL TC chairs to the BPEL TC 
>> members, in last week's BPEL TC conf-call.
>>
>> I think we may want to revisit it only when we have a better 
>> understanding on the use cases and requirements, and have made some 
>> progress on the harvesting fronts. Then questions like 'what 
>> semantics of web services really means' will become more easier for 
>> us to > answer.
>>
>> "Cummins, Fred A" wrote:
>>
>>> Martin, et al,
>>>
>>> Try this approach:
>>>
>>> The mission of the W3C Web Services Choreography Working Group is to 
>>> define
>>> a choreography language for specification of the acceptable 
>>> sequences of
>>> exchange of messages by participants as they attempt to achieve a 
>>> desired
>>> business transaction.  The language must be expressed in XML.  A
>>> choreography specification must complement the WSDL service 
>>> specifications
>>> of participants.  The choreography language should be able to 
>>> express the
>>> composition of more complex exchanges from simpler exchanges or 
>>> subordinate
>>> services.
>>>
>>> A choreography specification should enable each participant to 
>>> determine
>>> alternative message types that the participant may send as the 
>>> exchange
>>> progresses as well as the alternative message types it should be 
>>> prepared to
>>> receive from other participant(s).
>>>
>>> Fred
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 3:28 PM
>>>> To: Steve Ross-Talbot; Yaron Y. Goland
>>>> Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
>>>> Subject: RE: Revised: Mission Statement
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought by our discussion at the F2F that the "in the
>>>> middle of all of
>>>> them" is not what we are after, and in effect equates to the
>>>> O word. So I
>>>> would be interested in a better understanding of what
>>>> composition means,
>>>> given that this approach would not really support a wrapper
>>>> wsdl. I'm not
>>>> arguing against composition here, just asking for some clarity.
>>>>
>>>> Martin.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org
>>>>> [mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Steve 
>>>>> Ross-Talbot
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 10:52 AM
>>>>> To: Yaron Y. Goland
>>>>> Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Revised: Mission Statement
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Having some understanding of the achitecture of this thing
>>>> that we are
>>>>> doing
>>>>> would help us stay on the same page.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we have a global model then where does it sit with
>>>> respect to any N
>>>>> participants.
>>>>> Is it in the middle of all of them?
>>>>> Is it at each one's site?
>>>>> Is it a proxy sort of thing?
>>>>> Is it a web service itself?
>>>>>
>>>>> What happens when we have two of them and we wish to compose?
>>>>> What happens to the originals?
>>>>> Where does the new one reside?
>>>>>
>>>>> I could go on. It would just be nice to get a common
>>>> understanding. I
>>>>> have mine
>>>>> but I'm not sure it's the same as other peoples.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve T
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 06:33  pm, Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key issue for me is what does it mean to compose a
>>>> web service?
>>>>>> Does
>>>>>> this mean a new WSDL with some computer behind it that
>>>> then forwards
>>>>>> requests to existing web services? Does this mean that a client is
>>>>>> expected
>>>>>> to send messages to different WS who all have some kind of
>>>>>> relationship with
>>>>>> each other? It's so vague that I'm not sure what scope we would be
>>>>>> signing
>>>>>> up for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:monica.martin@sun.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 2:22 PM
>>>>>>> To: Yaron Y. Goland
>>>>>>> Cc: Francis McCabe; Burdett, David; Bonneau, Richard;
>>>> Assaf Arkin;
>>>>>>> Jean-Jacques Dubray; public-ws-chor@w3.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Revised: Mission Statement
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Goland: I don't understand what the terms service composition
>>>>>>> and service semantics
>>>>>>>> mean. Could someone please define them? Monica provides
>>>> a whole mess
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> definitions but having 10 definitions is just as bad as
>>>> having none.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mm1:  The definitions were a compilation on various types of
>>>>>>> composition from the team.  We have not settled on one
>>>>>>> definition, although I have provided one below that seems
>>>>>>> appropriate here for consideration.  The definitions provided
>>>>>>> span different areas of composition, and whether the team agrees
>>>>>>> they are all the same, I can not speculate on.  I think it
>>>>>>> evidences the multiple levels of discussions that are occurring.
>>>>>>> Don't shoot the messenger. I would propose: **A service
>>>>>>> composition is a composition of services that results in a new
>>>>>>> service. The new service can be the combination of distinct parts
>>>>>>> to form a whole of the same generic type. The web services could
>>>>>>> be combined to achieve a specific goal.*  *This integrates parts
>>>>>>> of the definitions of recursive, web service and choreography
>>>>>>> composition.
>>>>>>>>  Monica
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
>>>> privilege. If
>>>>>> you are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy
>>>> or disclose
>>>>>> its content but  delete the email and contact the sender
>>>> immediately.
>>>>>> Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails we are not
>>>>>> liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised
>>>> to run their
>>>>>> own antivirus software.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
>>>>> privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,  please do not
>>>>> copy or disclose its content but  delete the email and contact
>>>>> the sender immediately. Whilst we run antivirus software on all
>>>>> internet emails we are not liable for any loss or damage. The
>>>>> recipient is advised to run their own antivirus software.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. 
>> If you are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy or 
>> disclose its content but  delete the email and contact the sender 
>> immediately. Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails 
>> we are not liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to 
>> run their own antivirus software.
>>
>
> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If 
> you are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy or disclose 
> its content but  delete the email and contact the sender immediately. 
> Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails we are not 
> liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to run their 
> own antivirus software.
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 17:52:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:00:24 GMT