RE: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario]

Assaf/Jon

Would it make sense for to work together on the pros and cons of each
approach and then jointly submit it to the group?

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 1:23 PM
To: jdart@tibco.com
Cc: Patil Sanjaykumar; Burdett David; Ricky Ho; public-ws-chor@w3.org
Subject: Re: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario]


Since this would effect what the language looks like, I suggest we take 
a straw poll on this issue and also list all the 
objections/issues/concerns that members have regarding a particular 
approach they can't live with. Then see how to proceed from there.

arkin

Jon Dart wrote:

>
> I've discussed this internally with my colleague Bill Eidson, and we 
> think it is ok to have the choreography depend on abstract WSDL. The 
> implication is that you need to have a WSDL binding to whatever 
> message format and/or protocol you are using. I realize others may 
> have different opinions.
>
> --Jon
>
> Assaf Arkin wrote:
>
>> The question is, is there any technical justification for doing 3 
>> instead of 1 because at the end of the day inspite the additional 
>> layer introduced by 3 it makes our job easier?
>>
>> 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.