- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:06:07 -0500
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 3:51 PM > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Hypermedia workflow > > > simpler, and more easily coordinated fashion (IMO), where > BPEL documents > do not need to be exchanged in order to "do workflow", since > application > state is driven entirely by walking a hypermedia application graph. > > http://www.markbaker.ca/2002/12/HypermediaWorkflow/ Isn't the whole POINT of BPEL (and friends) to have the choreography exchanged among all parties so that they KNOW what the states and transition rules are up front, rather than simply having the server tell them what state they just put the message in? I can imagine (I think) a RESTful implementation of a BPEL-like system, but this doesn't look like one. I don't see anything in that quote from Dr. Fielding to imply that the rules can't be shared, only that the engine(s) work off the resource/representation paradigm.
Received on Friday, 20 December 2002 16:06:18 UTC