- From: Yaron Y. Goland <ygoland@bea.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:54:42 -0700
- To: <Daniel_Austin@grainger.com>, <arkin@intalio.com>
- Cc: <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, <jjd@eigner.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>, <public-ws-chor-request@w3.org>
I'm not sure which part of the charter you are referring to. Do you mean section 2.2? Since WSDL is not a programming language I'm not sure how that section would apply to Asaf's comments. Yaron > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > Daniel_Austin@grainger.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 11:29 AM > To: arkin@intalio.com > Cc: Daniel_Austin@grainger.com; david.burdett@commerceone.com; > jjd@eigner.com; public-ws-chor@w3.org; public-ws-chor-request@w3.org > Subject: Re: Straw-man Proposal for our mission statement > > > > > Hi Assaf, > > i disagree with your statement below, simply because our charter > specifically says that we will *not* create bindings to any specific > language. Thus it is out of scope for us to develop bindings for > WSDL, etc. > > Regards, > > D- > > ************************************************* > Dr. Daniel Austin > Sr. Technical Architect / Architecture Team Lead > daniel_austin@notes.grainger.com <----- Note change! > 847 793 5044 > Visit http://www.grainger.com > > "If I get a little money, I buy books. If there is anything left over, I > buy clothing and food." > -Erasmus > > > > > "Assaf Arkin" > > <arkin@intalio.com To: > "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com> > > cc: > "'Jean-Jacques Dubray'" <jjd@eigner.com>, Daniel_Austin@grainger.com, > Sent by: > public-ws-chor@w3.org > > public-ws-chor-req Subject: Re: > Straw-man Proposal for our mission statement > uest@w3.org > > > > > > 05/12/2003 06:06 > > PM > > > > > > > > > > > My take on this: > > In reviewing other specifications in this space including security (the > WS-Security stack, SAML, etc), coordination (WS-TX and BTP), reliable > messaging (WS-RM(1) and WS-RM(2)) and even not yet discussed > specifications such as WS-Policy, WS-Addressing, management specs, etc, > they all seem to be recommend that we write choreographies using WSDL > operations. > > These specification will either add additional dimensions by referencing > the same WSDL operation we reference, or by being part of the protocol > binding used by that WSDL operation (in effect also referencing them) > when it comes time to actually exchange messages. > > So clearly the way to go is to write a choroegraphy definition by > referencing WSDL operations. Then you get everything else that works > with WSDL for free, including stuff that's available now and specs we > anticipate will be standardized in the near future. > > Of course this only works with that list of specifications and relates > specifications that are part of the WS stack. The question then becomes, > are there other specifications we want to support that work in different > ways indicating that we need to keep our options open? > > arkin > > > Burdett, David wrote: > > >I find myself agreeing with JJ again when he says ... > > > >[JJ] yes, one of the value of the spec could be to offer a binding to > >WSDL but remain open to other bindings. > > > >I think this is an important principle if only because, as bindings > evolve, > >which they surely will to support security, reliability etc, > then only our > >binding will need to change, the main spec, hopefull, should not need to > >change. > > > >My $0.02c > > > >David > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Jean-Jacques Dubray [mailto:jjd@eigner.com] > >Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 1:09 PM > >To: Daniel_Austin@grainger.com; jjd@eigner.com > >Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org > >Subject: RE: Straw-man Proposal for our mission statement > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> I don't necessarily buy the argument that we are only talking > >>> > >>> > >about > > > > > >>>the interactions between one WSDL-ized object and another. WSDL is > >>> > >>> > >just > > > > > >>>one > >>> > >>> > > > -- > "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 Monday, 19 May 2003 18:54:45 UTC