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

Re: Straw-man Proposal for our mission statement

From: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 16:06:49 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC02909.1080509@intalio.com>
To: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
CC: "'Jean-Jacques Dubray'" <jjd@eigner.com>, Daniel_Austin@grainger.com, public-ws-chor@w3.org

My take on this:

In reviewing other specifications in this space including security (the 
WS-Security stack, SAML, etc), coordination (WS-TX and BTP), reliable 
messaging (WS-RM(1) and WS-RM(2)) and even not yet discussed 
specifications such as WS-Policy, WS-Addressing, management specs, etc, 
they all seem to be recommend that we write choreographies using WSDL 

These specification will either add additional dimensions by referencing 
the same WSDL operation we reference, or by being part of the protocol 
binding used by that WSDL operation (in effect also referencing them) 
when it comes time to actually exchange messages.

So clearly the way to go is to write a choroegraphy definition by 
referencing WSDL operations. Then you get everything else that works 
with WSDL for free, including stuff that's available now and specs we 
anticipate will be standardized in the near future.

Of course this only works with that list of specifications and relates 
specifications that are part of the WS stack. The question then becomes, 
are there other specifications we want to support that work in different 
ways indicating that we need to keep our options open?


Burdett, David wrote:

>I find myself agreeing with JJ again when he says ...
>[JJ] yes, one of the value of the spec could be to offer a binding to
>WSDL but remain open to other bindings.
>I think this is an important principle if only because, as bindings evolve,
>which they surely will to support security, reliability etc, then only our
>binding will need to change, the main spec, hopefull, should not need to
>My $0.02c
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jean-Jacques Dubray [mailto:jjd@eigner.com]
>Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 1:09 PM
>To: Daniel_Austin@grainger.com; jjd@eigner.com
>Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
>Subject: RE: Straw-man Proposal for our mission statement
>>>     I don't necessarily buy the argument that we are only talking
>>>the interactions between one WSDL-ized object and another. WSDL is

"Those who can, do; those who can't, make screenshots"

Assaf Arkin                                          arkin@intalio.com
Intalio Inc.                                           www.intalio.com
The Business Process Management Company                 (650) 577 4700

This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee and
may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL.
If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this
communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments
and notify us immediately.
Received on Monday, 12 May 2003 19:09:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:58 UTC