- From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:49:13 -0800
- To: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
- Cc: bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
Assaf Arkin wrote: > For me it's appealing to have a language that can describe the choreography > of services and be part of the WS SOA. It's also appealing to have a > language that described pre-negotiated business collaborations. And it's > even more appealing if the service interaction resulting from a combination > of BPSS, RSS, CPA negotiation, etc could be described in terms of a service > choreography. I'm all for generality if it doesn't have an unacceptably high cost in terms of complexity. But I'm afraid it will have a high cost, if we set out to build a framework in which to model every possible form of interaction. So I am concerned about scope creep. I also don't want to duplicate what ws-arch is doing, namely, defining what constitutes a SOA at a very high level of abstraction.
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 16:52:35 UTC