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

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

From: Stephen White <swhite@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:24:10 -0800
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC9930FE3@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "Francis McCabe" <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Ricky Ho" <riho@cisco.com>, <edwink@collaxa.com>, <jdart@tibco.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

See inline comments.


-----Original Message-----
From: Francis McCabe [mailto:fgm@fla.fujitsu.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 9:11 AM
To: Stephen White
Cc: Ricky Ho; edwink@collaxa.com; jdart@tibco.com; public-ws-chor@w3.org
Subject: Re: More about the patient/receptionist/doctor use case.

On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 09:30  AM, Stephen White wrote:

> I was having trouble following the use case as a text description, so
> I made up a couple of diagrams to help me follow the example. There is
> a diagram with a 3-party choreography (3Part_Pat-Recp-Doc.jpg) and
> three separate diagrams of the individual 2-party choreographies
> (within 3_2Part_Pat-Recp-Doc.jpg). I am sending in the diagrams to
> help those like me who need to see pictures.

One issue behind diagrams like these is that (a) they presuppose an
ordering relationship between messages between the receptionist and the
patient that is dependent on message between the doctor and the
receptionist. This is not accurate. 
[saw]I don't think this is an issue of the diagrams itself. The diagrams were to help visualize the issues of the discussion. A multi-Party choreography presupposes the ordering relationship you mention. But the individual 2-party choreographies do not presuppose this ordering relationship. The diagrams helped clarify the difference between the two approaches (at least for me).
And (b) that there is one
receptionist/patient interaction with every receptionist/doctor
interaction, again not sustainable; at least, the interleaving is not
so straightforward.
[saw]This might be an argument against a multi-party choreography or we should discuss a way of representing complexities of the relationships, if possible. Again, I intended the diagrams to help facilitate the discussions. 

Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 12:24:18 UTC

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