- From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:56:18 -0700
- To: "Cummins Fred A" <fred.cummins@eds.com>
- CC: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Cummins, Fred A wrote: > 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? Very good questions. But what do you want (or perhaps more importantly, need) it to do? As you say, a state machine is really a mechanism. What is the functional requirement? At minimum, I would guess it is the ability to transition to a distinct state when a timeout occurs. This state could be the termination of the choreography (implying no more processing will occur). Or it could be an error state (implying there might be some warning given, or some recovery effort made, e.g. a retry - this assumes you are doing this at the application level and not in some lower-level reliable messaging protocol). Certainly I can think of real-world examples where you'd need this functionality. This is something of a simplification of earlier proposals. If we need something more complex, I'd like to see some rationale behind it. --Jon
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 17:56:26 UTC