Conversations and choreography (was RE: Definition of Terms)

Assaf,

Just to make sure that I understand your point of view. Why isn't the
definition of the interactions between the patient and the receptionist
also called a choreography? 

It seems to me that you are introducing the term choreography and
conversation to address the problem of recursive composition (or lack of
it). Let's imagine that we need to expand the use case and add support
of hospital ticket validation (which is described as another
choreography). Can you compose the PRD choreography with the Hospital
Ticket Validation choreography, if so how and what would you call the
result.

Edwin




And 
* there is another choreography that defines how those
  sub choreographies are composed
 
> When two participants talk to each other they engage in a 
> conversation. 
> All other participants are not necessarily aware of that 
> conversation, 
> when it does not involve them. So a multi-party choreography 
> can express 
> multiple conversations that are going on and overlapping with each 
> other, by allowing a conversation to be scoped to a subset of 
> the parties.
> 
> In fact, what a multi-party tries to do is express how multiple 
> conversations are brought together in a larger context. It 
> can express 
> the causal dependency between these conversations and put a larger 
> context in which such relationships can be depicted.
> 
> For example, the patient-receptionist-doctor (PRD) scenario involves 
> three conversations and expresses the relationship between these 
> conversations:
> 
> 1. Patient-receptionist
> 2. Receptionist-doctor
> 3. Doctor-patient
> 
> These conversations do not follow each other: they are 
> interleaved. The 
> choreography starts and actuall ends in the scope of the 
> patient-receptionist conversation (from hi to bye). The 
> receptionist-doctor conversation starts before the doctor-patient but 
> concludes after the doctor-patient (doctor notifies recipient 
> it is now 
> able to accept patients).
> 
> There are much easier means to express sequences of 
> conversations, but 
> the only one that can express interleaved conversations with 
> dependency 
> between these conversations, is the multi-party choreography,
> 
> arkin
> 
> 
> -- 
> "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, 25 March 2003 16:59:24 UTC