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

RE: More about the patient/receptionist/doctor use case.

From: Edwin Khodabakchian <edwink@collaxa.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:09:12 -0800
To: "'Ricky Ho'" <riho@cisco.com>, <jdart@tibco.com>
Cc: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004101c2f31b$2abef760$660aa8c0@collaxa.net>


> > > Look at the pre-requisite of "MedicineDelivery" service.  
> It may not 
> > > be sufficient by just having the Prescription Receipt.  
> What if step 
> > > (7) hasn't happened.  the doctor hasn't told the receptionist to 
> > > prepare medicine so even though the patient presents the 
> > > prescription receipt, the receptionist is not going to 
> delivery the 
> > > medicine.
> >
> >This is where I think that the notion of responsibility is 
> important. I 
> >expect the doctor service to do the right thing and issue a valid 
> >prescription receipt. If the receipt end up being invalid, I can go 
> >back to the doctor and complain.
> Yes, but how do you express that responsibility in the choreography 
> definition ?

I think that the responsibility/commitment is expressed in the
PrescriptionReceipt document. Based on the use cases we have seen
enterprises care much more about the semantic of documents that the
state of a virtual conversation. This also allows for more natural
composition I think.

The conclusion here again is that one single universal choreography
approach and language might not work in for all use cases and n=2/n>2
might be a boundary case.

Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2003 17:09:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:57 UTC