- From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:22:53 -0700
- To: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
- Cc: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, "'Monica Martin'" <monica.martin@sun.com>, "'Martin Chapman'" <martin.chapman@oracle.com>, "'Yves Lafon'" <ylafon@w3.org>, "'Ugo Corda'" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, "'Cummins Fred A'" <fred.cummins@eds.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
+1. The description of particular service requirements and capabilities is generally in WSDL, or in WS-Policy, which can be viewed as a supplement to WSDL, not at the choreography layer. The set of such requirements and capabilities is expanding all the time. BPEL hasn't placed correlation-related requirements on services, either, but has provided a mechanism through which business processes can specify what the correlation mechanism is, in a flexible way that is conformable with multiple emerging specs in this area. --Jon Francis McCabe wrote: > A given service will have its *way* of doing things. That may, or may not be, fully described in a choreography document. There may even be a set of services that you want to coordinate in a particular fashion to achieve a particular goal (e.g., the warehouse, credit card, delivery services combine to deliver a book.) Each of these (say) does its thing in a rich way, and *I* want to document how to use them to achieve the book delivery service - I should be able to do that in a CDL without impacting any of the existing services. A corollary of that is that there may be no way of determining what choreography a given message is part of (by looking at the messages), it is simply an interpretation of the CDL.
Received on Friday, 5 September 2003 16:28:41 UTC