W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > August 2003

RE: simultaneous execution

From: Cummins, Fred A <fred.cummins@eds.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:35:08 -0500
Message-ID: <1A254DC4B97D8C4CB4A5611CF8058F5F017B8F14@USPLM214>
To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org

-----Original Message-----
From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 8:28 PM
To: Burdett, David; Cummins, Fred A
Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Subject: RE: simultaneous execution

>I want to see the choreography as light-weight 
>as possible so that it can be used independent 
>of the the message format employed by participants 
>or the technology employed, either the internal 
>technology (e.g., the business process language) 
>or the communication protocol (e.g., web 
>services or message broker). 
<DB> +1 ... and this is *exactly* what I tried to do in the WS-Choreography
spec. However since this is the WS Choreography group I think we *also* have
to define how the our Choreography spec binds to web services.</DB>

+1 to defining how WS-Choreography binds to Web services. 

The Charter specifically says: "The language(s) should build upon the
foundation of the WSDL 1.2". 

WSDL 1.2 defines interfaces and end points. If we don't at least define some
precise mapping between WS-Choreography and WSDL interfaces, then I don't
see in which way we are building "upon the foundation of WSDL 1.2".
[FAC] I believe we can do that without sacrificing broader applicability of
the choreography.  I'm more concerned that we not link the choreography to
the message formats. 

Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2003 17:35:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:10 UTC