- From: Cummins, Fred A <fred.cummins@eds.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:32:16 -0500
- To: jdart@tibco.com, public-ws-chor@w3.org
I don't see this as implementation, although it is dipping into a bit of detail that might be deferred. I think the discussion has demonstrated that we are talking about public state machines and events that correspond to the sending, receiving or time-out of messages. We might consider generic state machines as implied by David Burdett's note, where a transition from start state may occur by the sending of a message (client?) or the receipt of a message (server?). The state machine is then in an active state, may have a number of sub- states as the exchange progresses, and may leave the active state as a result of certain events such as a time-out. This raises questions about the scope of a choreography. When does it end? When a disconnect occurs? When a particular business transaction is completed? When a relationship is terminated? Maybe any of the above? Do the state machines provide the mechanism for nesting of component choreographies? Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Dart [mailto:jdart@tibco.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 4:20 PM > To: public-ws-chor@w3.org > Subject: RE: timeouts & states (was: Abstract Bindable Choreography) > > > > IMO this thread is veering into implementation, which, although the > proposals seem reasonable, is premature IMO. > > Can I suggest a re-focusing of the thread on the requirements for > timeout handling (and perhaps error handling in general)? > > --Jon > >
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 17:32:30 UTC