- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:44:43 -0800
- To: "Steve Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Steve, I think your orchestration definition below is too vague and could refer to meanings that are not related to orchestration at all (for example, "the way a single Web service should be used is by sending messages as specified in the corresponding WSDL file, at the address specified in the same file"). A more appropriate definition would be, in my mind, something like: A written business protocol (i.e. abstract WS-BPEL) description documents how a set of Web Services should be "used", as expressed from the point of view of one of the participating Web services. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Steve Ross-Talbot > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 11:32 PM > To: public-ws-chor@w3.org > Subject: Fwd: A trial balloon distinction between choreography & > orchestration > > > > As an aside from all of the stuff going on in requirements I would be > interested on peoples take on what Frank postulated as a distinction > between the O word and the C word. As a guiding principle in > how we may > view a CDL is this helpful? > > Suppose we changed it slightly to read: > > A written choreography description documents how a set > of Web Services > should be "used". > > This minor change could then incorporate design-time use as well as > run-time use (for conformance and compliance to a choreography). > > On the other hand WS-BPEL executable processes falls into the latter > (the O-word) and abstract processes are a modified lesser form of > contract such as: > > A written business protocol (i.e. abstract WS-BPEL) description > describes how a single Web Service should be "used". > > Just a thought .... > > Cheers > > Steve T > > Begin forwarded message: > > > Resent-From: public-ws-chor@w3.org > > From: Frank McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com> > > Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 2:36:33 am Europe/London > > To: public-ws-chor@w3.org > > Subject: A trial balloon distinction between choreography & > > orchestration > > > > > > I am aware that the O word is taboo. However, the following > occurred > > to me during the last F2F: > > > > A written choreography description documents how to *use* a > set of Web > > services > > A written orchestration description documents how to > *control* a set > > of Web services > > > > Comments? > > Frank > > > > This email is confidential and may be protected by legal > privilege. If > > you are not the intended recipient, please do not copy or disclose > > its content but delete the email and contact the sender > immediately. > > Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails we are not > > liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to > run their > > own antivirus software. > > > > This email is confidential and may be protected by legal > privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please do > not copy or disclose its content but delete the email and > contact the sender immediately. Whilst we run antivirus > software on all internet emails we are not liable for any > loss or damage. The recipient is advised to run their own > antivirus software. > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 13:44:44 UTC