- From: David Martin <martin@AI.SRI.COM>
- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:05:42 -0700
- To: Daniel Elenius <daele@ida.liu.se>
- CC: public-sws-ig@w3.org
Daniel Elenius wrote: > > Hi. > > Here is a whole bunch of issues/questions/comments on OWL-S that I wish > to discuss. Please dig in on any of them that you like. (The comments > below refer to OWL-S 1.1 beta.) > > .... stuff omitted > > 5) Split+Join vs Unordered > What is the difference between these two control constructs? Can I get > an example to show the difference? From the technical overview, it appears to me that there's only one difference: split+join indicates *concurrent* execution of a group of activities, whereas unordered is non-committal on that point. That is, unordered is "looser", in that it could allow for either a sequential or a concurrent execution (or perhaps some arbitrary combination of the 2 approaches). (Thus, informally, one could think of the set of unordered executions as a superset of the set of split+join executions.) As to how often anyone would care about this distinction, or if it should be retained, that's a separate matter I guess. Comments are welcome on this question. Regards, David
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 08:06:25 UTC