- From: Patil, Sanjaykumar <sanjay.patil@iona.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:22:28 -0800
- To: <jdart@tibco.com>, <Daniel_Austin@grainger.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
As far as requirements are concerned, is the general agreement that - we need to support "Multiparty Collaborations". Whether the method of decomposing a collaboration into "Binary Collaborations" is the appropriate and complete solution or not can be deferred to the specification phase (it's a "how" question in Daniel's words, I guess). Sanjay Patil Distinguished Engineer sanjay.patil@iona.com ------------------------------------------------------- IONA Technologies 2350 Mission College Blvd. Suite 650 Santa Clara, CA 95054 Tel: (408) 350 9619 Fax: (408) 350 9501 ------------------------------------------------------- Making Software Work Together TM -----Original Message----- From: Jon Dart [mailto:jdart@tibco.com] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 2:29 PM To: Daniel_Austin@grainger.com Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org Subject: Re: requirements summary Daniel_Austin@grainger.com wrote: > 2. Multi-party vs. bilateral choreography: there is some skepticism > that modelling bilateral interactions is sufficient. > > I certainly don't think that is it sufficient to model only bilateral > transactions. Many business transactions have multiple actors, and we want > to build standards that will work for common service transaction models. Note that it is not exactly all or nothing here. BPSS for example supports "MultiParty Collaborations", but does so by composing them out of "Binary Collaborations". --Jon
Received on Monday, 24 March 2003 22:25:06 UTC