- From: Andrew Berry <andyb@whyanbeel.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:57:15 +1000
- To: Howard N Smith <howard.smith@ontology.org>
- Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org, W.M.P.v.d.Aalst@tm.tue.nl
Howard, You have a fundamental problem with the choice of Pi Calculus: there is no concept of locality or partial state. In choreography and web services in general, you can guarantee that participants (processes) are physically distributed and need to make choices based on a partial view of state. To successfully model, program and reason about these processes, you need to be able to identify and reason about partial states. Consider your deferred choice semantics. If the processes identified as choices are physically distributed, you *cannot* make a choice without synchronisation of processes because distinct choices can be made in a truly concurrent fashion. Pi Calculus has no way of identifying this issue, let alone reasoning about it. Explicit synchronisation processes, while solving the problem for a given process, require that the programmer reason about distribution and locality outside the bounds of the Pi Calculus semantics. I would therefore argue that a worflow and in particular a choreography is not a Pi Process. Ciao, AndyB On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 03:00 AM, Howard N Smith wrote: > > Choreography pioneers, > > Following a short conversation with Steve R-T, he agreed for me to > send you this paper. > It is intended as a draft for discussion. > > The paper is new information. It shows how, based on BPML, it is > possible to model all > of the advanced workflow patterns identified by workflow theorists, > whereas most workflow > engines only support approx 50% of patterns directly and very few of > the advanced patterns. > In addition, it gives insights into the BPML implementation inherent > to a BPMS, and how a > BPMS is able to support many process models not supported by workflow > technology. > Screenshots from Intalio|n3 BPMS are given as examples. Further, the > workflow engine itself can > be modelled in BPML, as reusable processes for use in end-to-end > processes. The paper was > written to more fully explain the work of BPMI.org and its direction > in creating BPMS foundation > technologies. > > Peter Fingar and I have taken great care with this paper, and do hope > it adds to the > understanding of BPML/BPMI/BPMS direction. While the paper cannot > present proof of > these claims, you can consider it a report on the work so far. > > The paper can be downloaded from: > > http://www.bpm3.com/picalculus/workflow-is-just-a-pi-process.pdf > > Regards, > > Howard > > > --- > > New Book - Business Process Management: The Third Wave > www.bpm3.com > > Howard Smith/CSC/BPMI.org > cell +44 7711 594 494 (worldwide) > home office +44 20 8660 1963 >
Received on Monday, 17 November 2003 05:58:36 UTC