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

Re: Oracle's CDL contribution transaction question

From: Anders W. Tell <opensource@toolsmiths.se>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:59:27 +0200
Message-ID: <3F96630F.90308@toolsmiths.se>
To: "Fletcher, Tony" <Tony.Fletcher@choreology.com>
Cc: Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@enigmatec.net>, public-ws-chor@w3.org

Dear Tony, a comment from the sidebar.

Fletcher, Tony wrote:

> 1)  I would like to see the word 'compensation' replaced with 
> 'outcome' (most general but applicable term that I can currently think 
> of, stepping down a fraction of a level my next choice would be ' 
> confirmation or cancellation') so the requirement would read:
> 12. Assert when Web Service participants are capable of managing their 
> collaborations in a transactional way, to precisely define the 
> transaction boundaries and the common observable *outcome* behaviour. 
> Coordinate the outcome of the long-lived collaborations, which include 
> multiple, often recursive collaboration units, each with its own 
> business rules and goals

The comment,recommendation you make is a very relevant one. Its is 
better to use a generic term in this case than a specific one.

It is possible though to reintroduce compensation by adding a 
classification schema for outcomes or an outcome ontology. There one can 
add "valuation" (within specific context) of outcomes or the different 
business path taken. Are they positive (happy path,success), negative 
(compensation, cancelation) or neutral (choice) or ...

Some of the ourcomes are legally relevant and some are not and the use 
of terms must reflect this relevance (somewhere). Cancellation of a 
document exchange may not be same as cancelling an offer.

Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2003 07:04:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:01 UTC