W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > April 2004

Re: Issue: Levels or types of Choreography description

From: Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 11:28:28 -0600
To: Tony Fletcher <tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com>
Cc: WS-Choreography List <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-id: <407C233C.3070704@sun.com>

Tony Fletcher wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>  
> The first draft of the proposed Choreography description language 
> contained the definition of three levels of description: abstract, 
> portable and concrete.  Personally I had some sympathy with this 
> notion, though it was debated as to how many levels were required and 
> what the precise definition of each should be.
>  
> As the notion of levels has been removed completely from the current 
> editors draft, I would like to raise an issue on this.
>  
> Levels or types of Choreography description:  I suggest that we should 
> specify at least two levels or types of Choreography description.
>  
> One level could be called abstract or business process oriented or 
> some such.  It would support focus on the definition of the business 
> exchanges.  It would specify the allowed sequencing of messages and 
> the nature of each message.  It would not have to provide a precise 
> specification (/schema) for each message nor how each message was to 
> be transported.  This it would allow agreement of the basic business 
> 'protocol' but would be insufficient to enable interoperability on its 
> own.
>  
> Another level or type of Choreography description would provide a 
> precise specification and schema for each message and how each message 
> was to be transported.  It would thus be a basis for interoperation or 
> at least provide the interoperability specification of the upper 
> layers of the protocol stack.
>  

mm1: To Tony's point, the F2F resolve was to create two distinct levels 
or layers. The current draft does not contain this information.
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2004 13:29:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:24 UTC