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

Re: Revised: Mission Statement

From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 10:00:38 -0700
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
To: Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@enigmatec.net>
Message-Id: <88CB4BAF-B09C-11D7-8C30-000393A3327C@fla.fujitsu.com>

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 GMT

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