- From: Cummins, Fred A <fred.cummins@eds.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:45:32 -0500
- To: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
- Cc: "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
Assaf, See below. Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 10:19 PM > To: Cummins, Fred A > Cc: Monica J. Martin; public-ws-chor@w3.org > Subject: Re: Feedback on Glossary > > > Cummins, Fred A wrote: > > >Monica, > > > >Process. A process is a group of interrelated actions or > activities that > >are specified to achieve a defined objective and are > complete when that > >objective is achieved or abandoned. > > > > > I picked this interesting definition from, or all places, pi-calculus: > > A process is generally nothing more than a set of commitments. [fac] This seems a bit too simplistic. One could infer that a process does'nt actually accomplish anything. > > >Process instance. The execution of a process to achieve its defined > >objective in a particular situation. > > > > > +1 > > >Role. An abstract designation for a participant in a > choreography that is > >bound to a particular participant URI when the choreography > is performed. > >In some choreographies, the same participant may be bound to > multiple roles, > >or a role may be bound to different participants at > different times during > >the execution of a choreography. > > > > > +1 > > >State. An attribute value or set of values of attributes of > an entity that > >represent a condition of interest for that entity. > Typically, a number of > >states of an entity are of interest, each will be named, and > the events > >which may cause transitions between these states will be > defined for state > >transitions. The alternative states of an entity will > typically be defined > >in a particular context (an entity may have many states of > interest in > >different contexts), and suggests--by reference to state > transitions--how > >that entity will behave in the associated context. > > > > > +1 with a minor objection. > > Some state transitions are better defined as graphs depicting the > possible transitions between a finite set of states. For example from > submitted to approved to pending to shipped. Other state > transitions are > not easily modeled as graphs like that. For example, if I > have a price > for the order and I need to add shipping & handling based on the > destination and weight, the transition is from some number N to some > other number N. Do I write a graph with all possible state > transition s > or are there some transitions not modeled as a graph? Can we identify > more generically these two types of states and transitions? [fac] I wonder if we couldn't leave this discussion to the definition of state transition. > > >Service type. A service that conforms to a WSDL interface > and conforms to a > >defined choreography in a specified role. > > > > > WSDL interface defines some of the expected behavior of a > service type > and WS-Chor defines other part of that behavior. WSDL can > also define an > interface beloning to that type by associating it with the interface. > However, somewhere along the actual concept of service type > managed to > escape and I think we need to introduce it in more generic terms than > the particular type of WSDL definition used to capture its behavior. [fac] Is your intent to attach some additional semantics to a service type? If not, what will distinguish one service type from another if not the WSDL and choreography? > > arkin > > >Fred Cummins > >EDS > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:monica.martin@sun.com] > >>Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 1:05 AM > >>To: Steve Ross-Talbot > >>Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org > >>Subject: WS[Chor 4/21/2003: Updated Cases Submitted and Choreography > >>Terms to Consider > >> > >> > >>As indicated, attached is the working glossary with the comments I > >>received from Assaf and Hugo. I also heard from Mike Brumbelow, who > >>wishes to assist on glossary. Mike, please do a pass over this for > >>tomorrow and once the discussion gets going, we'll do so as > >>well. Those > >>items in red in the document are changes made from comments > received. > >>Comments / questions are also inserted in these sections, for team > >>discussion at the appropriate time. > >> > >>As well, as requested last week, I've added additional detail > >>to my two > >>cases for consideration with some potential areas to mine for > >>requirements. These scenarios were based on real world > >>requirements in > >>European and high technology/electronic component industries. > >> > >>Thanks. > >>Monica J. Martin > >>Sun Microsystems > >> > >> > >>Monica J. Martin wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>I have the glossary with questions for the group to address > >>> > >>> > >>and will > >> > >> > >>>distribute this afternoon (MT). > >>>Thanks. > >>>Steve Ross-Talbot wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Any suggestions? > >>>> > >>>>I have until 8:00pm my time (UK) to firm this up and get it out. > >>>>Cheers > >>>> > >>>>Steve T > >>>> > >>>>This email is confidential and may be protected by legal > >>>> > >>>> > >>privilege. > >> > >> > >>>>If you are not the intended recipient, please do not copy > >>>> > >>>> > >>or disclose > >> > >> > >>>>its content but delete the email and contact the sender > >>>> > >>>> > >>immediately. > >> > >> > >>>>Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails > we are not > >>>>liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to > >>>> > >>>> > >>run their > >> > >> > >>>>own antivirus software. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > -- > "Those who can, do; those who can't, make screenshots" > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Assaf Arkin arkin@intalio.com > Intalio Inc. www.intalio.com > The Business Process Management Company (650) 577 4700 > > > This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee and > may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. > If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this > communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication > in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments > and notify us immediately. > >
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2003 22:45:41 UTC