- From: Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:30:43 -0800
- To: "WS Choreography (E-mail)" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Reference: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=687 Item 1: closed Item 2: closed Item 3: see below On 12 October, I sent a message to the public list re: Issue 687.3 and was asked to provide a proposal 26 October 2004. See below. 3. In the F2F in March 2004, we indicated we did not acknowledge 'dependent' choreographies (the blue boxes) that exist in the package or root (blue box). How then can we handle dependencies between imported, performed and choreographies with root=false? 3.1 The current 22 Sept 2004 specification indicates that the bind variables if available between the performing and performed choreographies should be of the same participant type. It is often the case that, for example, a retailer takes on several roles across these composed choreographies. The Seller for the sale, the distributor for the warehouse, etc. Does the bind element enforce the same participant type via the semantics (The Role Types within a single bind element MUST be carried out by the same party, hence they MUST belong to the same Participant Type)? >>Proposal: Defer to discussion by Tony Fletcher proposal on Participant Type and Role Types. I believe my example above is relevant to his proposal. Reference: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2004Oct/0057.html 3.2 In the Choreography package, if we do not have priority, can we enforce that the performed choreography can not be used unless enclosed in the enclosing choreography? If the answer is yes and the semantics support that, we can close 687.3. Otherwise, a priority or an enforceable sequence may be required. I am attempting to differentiate two choreographies in progress in the same package vs. one choreography in use and completes before the next choreography does. If we answer, we can also close Issue 615. Thank you. >>Proposal: Provide two examples in the specification like those included in reference that show how choreographies are performed. The two examples show sequential and parallel choreographies. This would result in no syntactic or semantic change (unless we consider strict sequence which has been a part of a recent discussion with Kohei Honda). Reference: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2004Oct/0049.html (Kavantzas) Thanks.
Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2004 19:30:43 UTC