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

Re: State alignment

From: Haugen Robert <Robert.Haugen@choreology.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:57:07 +0100
Message-ID: <221369570DEDF346AE42821041345E8951BBC1@imap.choreology.com>
To: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

Mark Baker wrote:
>POST an order to an order processor.  The HTTP response will give you
>the signal you need to know that the state was successfully
transferred.
>  
>

Anders Tell replied:
<AWT>
This work for "declarations" but not for "proposals" since a proposal is

followed by "acceptance, rejection" ("withdrawal, revocation, late 
acceptance, notice")

When looking at different legal texts regading criterias for Receipt one

can easilly see that they are not the same. This means that it will be 
difficult to use 2XX without any additional information that with 
precision describes it meaning.
</AWT>

I'm glad you raised the issue of proposals.  State alignment is one of
those heavily overloaded concepts that confuse discussions.  In this
discussion, at least two meanings are floating around:

1. Information state alignment, that is, we can be assured that we both
have the same information.

2. Agreement, that is, we both agree on the same proposal (e.g.
contract).

Proposals require at least two phases, one: proposal, two: response.

Both phases require information state alignment, which requires a
receipt that follows some business rules, which I know you've studied in
detail, Anders.  

Agreement requires something like a business transaction protocol.
Received on Saturday, 26 June 2004 07:57:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:25 UTC