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

Re: BurdettML comments

From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 09:56:15 -0700
Message-ID: <3EF9D42F.10804@tibco.com>
To: "Burdett David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
CC: "'public-ws-chor@w3.org '" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

Burdett, David wrote:

> Also in my spec I assumed that an Interaction was implmented by a single
> message (ignoring signals) sent from one role to another. In your example
> for "DoLogin" to succeed, you would need two messages the LoginRequest from
> the client to the server and the LoginResponse from the server to the
> client. The result could be either succeed or fail.

One issue here for me is how this maps into the SOAP/WSDL layer (if 
there is one). The simple way to implement login is with a request/reply 
MEP. Then there are two messages, as you suggest, but it is one 
operation, in the WSDL sense of the term. Maybe it should be possible to 
include such a MEP in the choreography without explicitly showing the 
two messages - it is a logical unit.

Generally, I am concerned about duplicating WSDL layer information into 
the choreography layer. When you have duplication you also have the 
possibility for the information to get out of sync.

Also re failure: if you are using SOAP, the WSDL tells you if a fault 
condition is possible. If this fault leads to a state transition it may 
need to be handled explicitly in the choreography. But perhaps there 
should be a default behavior (termination of the choreography?). Also 
something like the BPEL concept of fault handlers may be necessary. 
There is no equivalent concept in BurdettML, AFAIK.

Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 12:56:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:59 UTC