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

Scope of Choroegraphy Standardization (was RE: Definition of Chor eography)

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:32:27 -0600
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E4042DE0D6@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Burdett, David [mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 7:58 PM
> To: 'Champion, Mike'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Definition of Choreography
> I think this is an important distinction as:
> 1. Public processes need to be standardized, private ones do not.
> 2. Anything that needs to be standardized should have a 
> formal way of being
> defined as an aid to understanding and therefore interoperability

How do people feel about this as a first cut at specifying what subset of
WSCI/BPEL should be in scope for the Choreography WG charter?  

Also, to what extent does "public" equate to "declarative" in reference to
our recent discussions?  Of course, the "private" part could be described
with a declarative language (Prolog, or even XSLT, since it's
Turing-complete) but I can't see how a "procedural" definition of a public
interface would be useful.
Received on Saturday, 19 October 2002 16:33:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:00 UTC