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

RE: Proposed Text on Clocks

From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:48:19 -0000
To: "'Yves Lafon'" <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: "'WS-Choreography List'" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001801c4c5bb$22ecd880$0901a8c0@ie.oracle.com>

sounds ok to me

>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org 
>[mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yves Lafon
>Sent: 08 November 2004 16:39
>To: Martin Chapman
>Cc: 'WS-Choreography List'
>Subject: Re: Proposed Text on Clocks
>
>
>On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Martin Chapman wrote:
>
>>
>> I propose the following to be insterted into the introduction:
>>
>> 1.6 Time Assumptions
>>
>> CDL has been designed to support intra and inter business 
>activity. In
>> such an environment, it is acceptable for different parties to be 
>> synchronizsed on second boundaries and not by finer grained 
>boundaries 
>> such as milli, micro, or nano seconds. Thus there is an 
>assumption that 
>> each party is responsible for its own synchronization to UTC 
>and that no 
>> clock synchronisation protocol is required. Applying CDL to 
>a different 
>> environment where finer granularity and synchronisation is required, 
>> e.g. real-time embedded systems, is possible, but will required 
>> additional support not defined here.
>
>How about something along the lines of:
><<
>CDL does not put any assumption on clock synchronization 
>between involved 
>parties. In some specific environments, like usual business 
>activities, it 
>can be assumed that all parties are reasonably well 
>synchronized on second 
>boundaries, however for all application requiring finer grain time 
>synchronization or that have same-time requirements amongst all 
>participants, additionnal support and control may be required 
>but is out 
>of the scope of the CDL specification.
>>>
>
>It seems safer to say that in the general case, we can't 
>consider clocks 
>to be synchronized so that designers won't reach the case 
>where a supplier 
>is off by one hour without being warned that using relative time on 
>participant is more reliable that assuming synchronized clocks 
>(even on 
>second boundaries).
>
>-- 
>Yves Lafon - W3C
>"Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."
>
Received on Monday, 8 November 2004 17:49:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:01:10 GMT