W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws@w3.org > May 2003

Re: DAML-S ProcessModel

From: Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz <sambrosz@ipipan.waw.pl>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 17:53:35 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <200305191553.h4JFrZr26437@ns.ipipan.waw.pl>
To: www-ws@w3.org, agarwal@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de

Sudhir Agarwal wrote:
    "i currently can not understand the purpose of the ProcessModel 
    completely. I understand why an AtomicProcess is needed. 
    But, why does ComplexProcess exist? Isn't it enough to have 
    only AtomicProcess? Why should a web service 
    provider show how his services works? On the other hand, 
    im not sure that a web service requester is interested in 
    knowing all that (if-then-else, while, split, fork etc.) 
    stuff as long as the service does what he wants. Even if 
    someone really wants to know that, what can he do with that 
    knowledge? Does it help him in any way?
    ... "

Really good point concerning DAML-S. 
A service requester is interested merely in the type of service, i.e.,  
what the service does expressed in *a declarative way*. 
ProcessModel offers a description of service type, 
however in a procedural way, using "if-then-else, while, split, 
fork etc."

IMHO, a missing point of DAML-S is a clear definition of the 
concept of service type. 

It seems that the CompositeProcess defines service composition 
(integration) in a procedural manner. 
If it is the case, then it should be possible to make an abstraction 
and to expose a composite process as an atomic process like in BPEL4WS. 

Best regards,

-- Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz
Received on Monday, 19 May 2003 11:53:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:37:08 UTC