- From: Ed Peters <ed.peters@webmethods.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 08:56:15 -0800
- To: Jean-Jacques Dubray <jjd@eigner.com>, "'Burdett, David'" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
+1 It's useful to pick English-language words because of their meanings and connotations. But when we start mixing metaphors (like saying a "conversation" is an instance of a "choreography"), it becomes even harder to follow our terminology than if we had named things, "001" and "002". Ed > -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Jacques Dubray [mailto:jjd@eigner.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 4:45 PM > To: 'Burdett, David' > Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org > Subject: RE: Definition of Terms > > > > David: > > Even though all the names make the spec more poetic, I think > ultimately > it also makes it less readable. I am personally in favor of using full > names for the concept (e.g. collaboration, orchestration and then > proceed via fully qualified concepts: collaboration definition, > collaboration instance, collaboration instance history. The > can also use > TLAs, such as CD, CI, OD, OI, ... where appropriate. > > I am suggesting this because otherwise we need a full name for the > concept, its definition, its instances, ... some concept > might even have > a third level: such as "concept type usage". For instance in BPSS a > usage of a concept type is called an activity (Business Transaction -> > Business Transaction Activity). > > Look at how much confusion there is already between orchestration and > choreography! > > JJ- > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org] > >>On Behalf Of Burdett, David > >>Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 3:58 PM > >>To: Ricky Ho; Burdett, David; WS Choreography (E-mail) > >>Subject: RE: Definition of Terms > >> > >> > >>Assaf raised the same point suggesting that Conversation be > restricted > to > >>an > >>instance of a Choreography, in which case we need a word to describe > the > >>instance of an execution of an Orchestration. Generically, an > >>orchestration > >>instance is a process execution, but process executions are > much more > >>general. Do you (or anyone else) have any ideas? > >> > >>David > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Ricky Ho [mailto:riho@cisco.com] > >>Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 9:27 AM > >>To: Burdett, David; WS Choreography (E-mail) > >>Subject: Re: Definition of Terms > >> > >> > >>David, I agree with all except the last one "conversation". How can > an > >>object be an instance of two different classes ? > >> > >>Rgds, Ricky > >> > >>At 02:33 PM 3/17/2003 -0800, Burdett, David wrote: > >> > >>>Folks > >>>There has been a lot of discussion about Choreographies, > Orchestrations, > >>>Conversations, etc, so I thought it might help to make an > attempt at > some > >>>definitions of terms so that the distinction between them all was > clear. > >>>The following is my attempt. It starts with some very basic > definitions > >>on > >>>which later definitions rely. I am also certain that there is still > >>plenty > >>>of scope for improvement and revision, so comments are welcome. > >>>Hope this helps. > >>>David > >>>========================================= > >>>INFORMATION > >>>Information is data of a specific type, for example, "Order > Information", > >>>"Status Information". Information has a specific semantic meaning, > e.g. > >>>"Order Information" is a "request to purchase goods". The > same piece > of > >>>Information can take many different forms, for example an XML, PDF, > >>email, > >>>paper letter, fax, voice, etc. > >>>MESSAGE > >>>A Message is a description of one or more pieces of Information > combined > >>>with adressing information. A Message can have one or more > different > >>Message > >>>Representations. > >>>MESSAGE REPRESENTATION > >>>A Message Representation is a definition of the binding of > a message > to a > >>>particular form, for example each of the following are Message > >>>Representations: a UBL Order schema defintion within the Body of a > SOAP > >>>Message, an EDI Order document within an ebXML Message or a spoken > voice > >>>description of an Order. > >>>MESSAGE INSTANCE > >>>A Message Instance, is an instance of an actual Message > Representation, > >>e.g. > >>>a real UBL order expressed in XML with real line items > inside a SOAP > >>>message, etc. > >>>LOCATION > >>>A Location is a description of a person, place, software, > application > or > >>>service that can generate or accept Message Instances. A > Location may > >>accept > >>>or generate Message Instances in one or more different Message > >>>Representations. (In WSDL this would be a Port). > >>>ROLE > >>>A Role is a description of a set of related Processes that serve a > single > >>>purpose. For example a "buyer role" is the set of > activities taken by > a > >>>party, individual, business or software that are required > to purchase > >>goods. > >>>A Role may be supported at multiple Locations. A Location > may support > >>>multiple Roles. > >>>INTERACTION > >>>An Interaction is the definition of the sending of a > Message from one > >>Role > >>>to one other for a reason. For example: a) sending an > "order message" > >>from > >>a > >>>"buyer role" to a "supplier role" so that the "supplier role" can > satisfy > >>>the order, or b) sending an order message from an "archive > requesting > >>role" > >>>to an "archive "archiving accepting role" so that the > latter role can > >>>archive the order message. > >>>INTERACTION INSTANCE > >>>An Interaction Instance is the sending of one Message Instance from > one > >>>Location acting in one Role to another Location acting in another > Role. > >>>PROCESS > >>>A Process is the description of a set of activities that do useful > work > >>that > >>>occur as a result of an event such as the arrival of a Message > Instance > >>or > >>>the passage of time. The execution of a Process usually results in > the > >>>generation of additional Message Instances. > >>>SUB-PROCESS > >>>A Sub-Process is a Process that is executed as part of and > under the > >>control > >>>of another Process. > >>>CONTROL DOMAIN > >>>A Control Domain is a description of the set of Processes that are > under > >>the > >>>management control of a single entity or organization. The > Processes > and > >>the > >>>Sub-Processes that are within a Control Domain can only be > changed or > >>>altered by the entity that manages them. A Control Domain > can support > one > >>or > >>>more Roles. > >>>COLLABORATIVE PROCESS > >>>A Collaborative Process is a Process that is implemented through > >>>Interactions between two (or more) Roles within two (or > more) Control > >>>Domains. > >>>CHOREOGRAPHY > >>>A Choreography is the definition of the sequence and > dependencies of > the > >>>Interactions between Roles required to implement a Collaborative > Process. > >>>For example the process by which a "buyer role" places an > order with > a > >>>"supplier role", or the process by which a procurement system > comunicates > >>>order information with an ERP system. > >>>ORCHESTRATION > >>>An Orchestration is the definition of the sequence and dependencies > of > >>the > >>>Processes executed by a single Role. The Interactions that result > from > >>>executing the Processes MUST comply with: a) any > constraints implied > by > >>any > >>>Choreographies in which the Role takes part, and b) any constraints > on > >>>Message Representations that Locations that receive > Message Instances > >>>generated by the Orchestration require. > >>>All the Processes and Sub-Processes within a single Orchestration > >>definition > >>>should be related to one another. An Orchestration > definition may be > used > >>to > >>>define the behavior of a Process that is executed by a single Role. > >>>CONVERSATION > >>>A Conversation is an instance of the execution of a Choreography or > an > >>>Orchestration. > >>> > >>>Thoughts? > >>> > >>>Director, Product Management, Web Services > >>>Commerce One > >>>4440 Rosewood Drive, Pleasanton, CA 94588, USA > >>>Tel/VMail: +1 (925) 520 4422; Cell: +1 (925) 216 7704 > >>>mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com; Web: > http://www.commerceone.com > >
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 11:56:57 UTC