W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > October 2002

RE: Definition of Choreography

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 14:29:25 -0700
Message-ID: <C513FB68F8200244B570543EF3FC65370A855BC2@MAIL1.stc.com>
To: "'Scott Vorthmann'" <scottv@tibco.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org

Scott,

Another possibly useful concept along the lines of your note is that of
computability (a la Computability Theory). A behavior is computable (by
definition) in the case there exist an algorithm that can effectively
describe the behavior. That can be true regardless of whether the behavior
is described in a scripted/procedural/imperative form (in which case the
algorithm is already given) or whether the behavior is "emergent" from
rule/condition interactions (so that an algorithm still exists, even though
it's not explicitly given).

On the other hand, behavior expressed via rule/condition interactions might
not be computable, in the sense that there is no algorithm that can describe
it (because, for instance, the rules/conditions are incomplete).

If this concept is useful, my next question would be whether choreography
systems as they are described today in various specs always describe
behavior that is computable.

Ugo

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Vorthmann [mailto:scottv@tibco.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 1:59 PM
To: Mathews Walden; 'David Orchard'; 'Mark Baker'; 'Champion Mike'
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Definition of Choreography



Another way to look at the distinction, if it is useful:  is the behavior of
the system "scripted" in some direct (procedural/imperative) way, or
"emergent" from rule/condition interactions?

Scott
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2002 17:30:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:09 GMT