W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > April 2009

Re: XProc versus BPEL

From: David A. Lee <dlee@calldei.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:19:29 -0400
Message-ID: <3D0375E63E624369A91CEBF1E469B1AD@calldei.com>
To: "Florent Georges" <fgeorges@gmail.com>, "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
Cc: <xproc-dev@w3.org>
For BPEL dont forget the great open source product
https://sourceforge.net/projects/activebpel
They also have a comercial version, but the OS version is quite good.


As for comparing XProc and BPEL I also think its a mismatch of intent.

If you want to compare something to XProc I humbly suggest xmlsh 
(www.xmlsh.org) which is targeted at a much more similar set of use cases 
that xproc is (although it can handle non-xml data equally well).   Excepct 
an xproc module to xmlsh (based on calabash) shortly, and possibly a 
"native" xproc implementation in the far future.  But by itself (without the 
xproc plugin) the capibilities and intended use cases are similar, much more 
so then BPEL.

-David
-----------------------------------------------------------
David A. Lee
dlee@calldei.com
http://www.calldei.com
http://www.xmlsh.org




> 2009/4/22 Costello, Roger L. wrote:
>
>> I've taken a stab at comparing XProc and BPEL.
>
>  Well, IMHO they have little in common.  The former is targeted at
> processing XML documents (connecting several processing steps) while
> the later is a declarative orchestration language for business
> processes.  Their subjects are not really the same beasts.
>
>  Regards,
>
> -- 
> Florent Georges
> http://www.fgeorges.org/
> 
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2009 13:21:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 22 April 2009 13:21:37 GMT