- From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 10:00:38 -0700
- To: Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@enigmatec.net>
- Cc: "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, 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
What makes you think that there is a one-to-one relationship between a choreography document and a WSDL document? I can easily imagine situations where there are any number of WSDL documents involved in a given choreography; and this is strictly independent of whether we call the resulting ensemble a service. Frank On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 07:14 AM, Steve Ross-Talbot wrote: > > I had another thought about this whole composition thing and > presenting choreographies as web services. > > We can take the view that a composition based on the web services that > went to make up a choreography as I stated in a previous email. > > We could, however, take an entirely different view such that the WSDL > interface to a choreography is simply to provide common access to > interrogation (query) of that choreography or validation of a > choreography. This way the services that are used to create a > choreography do not form part of the choreography WSDL interface at > all. > > And yet another approach is to take the above and combine it with > something akin to what I wrote previously. > > Questions to ask are: > > What do I want a choreography to do for me? > What is the lifecycle of a choreography? > > Cheers > > Steve T > > > On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 03:02 pm, Monica J. Martin wrote: > >> >>> >>> Hendler: Steve - in the compositions we've been playing with (some >>> of which I demoed at the first f2f, and anyone outside a firewall >>> can play with themselves from >>> http://www.mindswap.org/~evren/composer/, we do allow the creation >>> of new web services by the composition of existing ones - and these >>> services themselves can be composed with others -- the WSDL is >>> accomplished by grounding the service calls in WSDL (using the >>> DAML-S groundings) and the "choreography" we use is the DAML-S >>> process model. (I'm hoping the chor langauge we come up with will >>> replace the latter eventually) >>> that said, I agree with you that it probably is not "definitional" >>> that the composition results in a new "service" per se. I think I'd >>> like the idea of using "scope" in there, but don't have specific >>> words either -- I'll think on this >>> -JH >> >> >> mm1: Then could we revise this working definition? >> >>> **A service composition is a composition of services that results in >>> a ANOTHER service. THIS 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 does not preclude services within services, or a service set >> within another service set. >> >> Edit away, Jim. >> 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. >
Received on Monday, 7 July 2003 13:01:38 UTC