W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > January 2004

RE: WS Choreography Deliverables

From: Jeff Mischkinsky <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:14:45 -0800
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040129190754.040ebe28@rgmamerimap.oraclecorp.com>
To: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, "WS Choreography (E-mail)" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Cc: "WS Chor Editors (E-mail)" <member-ws-chor-editors@w3.org>

At 01:47 PM 1/29/2004, Burdett, David wrote:

>It would be normative in that it is the definitive authority. So if there 
>were was (which we hope not) an inconsistency between the "Primer" and the 
>"Descrption Language" specs then the Description Language spec should be 
>relied on.
>
>... or are you asking about the generating process language definitions 
>from CDL ... in that case, I (and I also think the other editors) have not 
>formed any clear view although we all thought that the potential value 
>meant that we should discuss the idea on the list.

I was asking about the mapping/generation description from cdl to a 
concrete execution/programming language.

I have to think about whether it should be an example (proof of concept) or 
a normative specification of exactly how to do such a mapping. It's worth 
some discussion.

cheers,
    jeff


>David
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Mischkinsky 
>[<mailto:jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>mailto:jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com]
>Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 10:40 AM
>To: Burdett, David; WS Choreography (E-mail)
>Cc: WS Chor Editors (E-mail)
>Subject: Re: WS Choreography Deliverables
>
>At 11:18 PM 1/28/2004, Burdett, David wrote:
> >As promised in the conference call on Tuesday, here's the draft of the WS
> >Choreography Deliverables document that describes what the editors think
> >should be the deliverables of the group. It identifies two main documents:
> >    * A "WS Choreography Primer", which would be non-normative
> >    * A "WS Choreography Description Language", which would be normative
> >It also identifies one possible additional document that would describe
> >how to generate process language definitions (e.g. BPEL) for a role from a
> >Choreography Definition.
>
>Would that be normative or more in the nature of an informative appendix or
>note?
>
>cheers,
>    jeff
>
> >
> >Comments are welcome.
> >
> >David
> >
> >
> >Director, Standards Strategy
> >Commerce One
> >One Market Street, Steuart Tower, Suite 1300, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA
> >Tel/VMail: +1 (415) 644 8700; Cell: +1 (925) 216 7704
> ><<<mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com>mailto:david.burdett@commerceone. 
> com>mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com>;
> >Web: 
> <<<http://www.commerceone.com/>http://www.commerceone.com/>http://www.commerceone.com> 
>
> >
>
>Jeff Mischkinsky                      jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
>Consulting Member Technical Staff     +1(650)506-1975
>Director, Web Services Standards      500 Oracle Parkway M/S 4OP9
>Oracle Corporation                    Redwood Shores, CA 94065

Jeff Mischkinsky                      jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
Consulting Member Technical Staff     +1(650)506-1975
Director, Web Services Standards      500 Oracle Parkway M/S 4OP9
Oracle Corporation                    Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 00:27:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:03 UTC