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

Beyond WSDL (was Re: [Requirements] Non-requirement for MEPs)

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:31:08 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f0dba9ba6c402d5@[]>
To: ChBussler@aol.com, steve@enigmatec.net, Tony.Fletcher@choreology.com, public-ws-chor@w3.org
Cc: ChBussler@aol.com
At 10:37 -0500 3/17/03, ChBussler@aol.com wrote:
>I think it is preferrable not to be restricted to WSDL, but also 
>allow for the inclusion of other definitions/mechanisms.

I agree w/Christoph.  In particular, I think that this WG could do a 
great service to the community if we build our specs around the 
assumption that there is some kind of "grounding" at a service level, 
but stay as independent of implementation details as possible.  If we 
did that, we would immediately allow the results of our WG to be 
applied to grid computing, to devices using UPnP or other such 
protocols, and to many govt applications where the infrastructure is 
dictated by either legacy approaches or specific needs differing from 
those in the commercial world.  Each of these three would represent a 
significant new market for service "choreographers" -- and I believe 
that the choreography level would be the appropriate level of 
abstraction for bringing these many types of services together (note 
also that this would be within our charter, but would also 
dfferentiate us a bit more from the WSA WG and WSD WG which are more 
focused on WSDL and web services more narrowly defined).
p.s. let me be clear, I think that our primary target remains 
composition/choreography of web services defined in WSDL, but if we 
develop an approach that spans beyond this, then we will be creating 
a more widely usable spec that could create significant new markets 
for WS-oriented companies.

>In a message dated 3/17/03 7:04:24 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>steve@enigmatec.net writes:
>>Subj:RE: [Requirements] Non-requirement for MEPs
>>Date:3/17/03 7:04:24 AM Pacific Standard Time
>>Sent from the Internet
>>I think that there is an implication of this exclusion. It is that 
>>the choreography would be tied to WSDL based MEP's. If however we 
>>make MEP's part of the scope then we could extend the reach of the 
>>work to include non-WSDL based formalisms.
>>Steve T
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org 
>>>[mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Fletcher, Tony
>>>Sent: 17 March 2003 13:26
>>>To: public-ws-chor@w3.org
>>>Subject: [Requirements] Non-requirement for MEPs
>>>Dear Colleagues,
>>>Just to put in a message what I stated at the inaugural F2F.
>>>Non- requirement for MEPs:
>>>It presently seems to me that it is a 'non-requirement' to 
>>>standards message exchange patterns (MEP) as part of the WS-Chor 
>>>work.  MEPs act as a constraint on what you can do, so if one, or 
>>>more, are defined we will have to be very sure that users of the 
>>>technique can live within that set of constraints without having 
>>>to 'jump through hoops' such as extending the standard MEPs or 
>>>having to chain them together to get the pattern they actually 
>>>We certainly need to specify the 'construct'  for sending a single 
>>>message so that should be added to the requirements list.
>>>We may also wish to standardise as part of the specification (in a 
>>>normative appendix perhaps) some standard business messages, such 
>>>as a generic error reporting message and an acknowledgement message
>>>Best Regards     Tony
>>>A M Fletcher
>>>Cohesions 1.0 (TM)
>>>Business transaction management software for application coordination
>>>Choreology Ltd., 13 Austin Friars, London EC2N 2JX     UK
>>>Tel: +44 (0) 20 76701787   Fax: +44 (0) 20 7670 1785  Mobile: +44 
>>>(0) 7801 948219
>>>(Home: amfletcher@iee.org)
>Christoph Bussler

Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Monday, 17 March 2003 11:31:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:56 UTC