W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > October 2006

Re: Clarifying exchange type

From: Kohei Honda <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:31:24 +0000
Message-ID: <454628DC.9070908@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>
To: Gary Brown <gary@pi4tech.com>
CC: Kohei Honda <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>, "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>, Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>, 'WS-Choreography List' <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

A bit confused with negation:

>
> From this viewpoint, my question is: are there any these 
> "request-reply" and its variants, including
> notifications, which cannot be captured as a pattern of interaction, 
> which can be made explicit by the
> use of  co-relation identity?

I meant, in the last clause: ..., which cannot be made explicit by the 
use of co-relation identity?

My question was, therefore: whether all can be captured by co-relation 
(or session) identities or not.
As written, even if all can, I do not oppose having explicit constructs 
for specifying local (or micro)
protocols.

kohei
Received on Monday, 30 October 2006 16:31:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:01:47 GMT