- From: Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 05:38:31 -0800
- To: Haugen Robert <Robert.Haugen@choreology.com>
- Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Haugen Robert wrote: >Monica J. Martin wrote: > > >>In thinking about nested choreographies, you could have a >>child derived from a parent OR a child that is dependent on a parent but >>not extended from it. Can we address either case (Proposal 6 includes the former only). >> >> >Proposal 6 is only trying to address the former case, which does not exist now in CDL. > >I'm not sure what you mean by the latter: >the relationship of an inner choreography to an enclosing one, >or the relationship between one choreography >that performs another? >I think both do now exist in CDL, >and are essentially the same, >although proposal 4 puts a new wrinkle on both. > > > mm1: The difference is that a child can not be run standalone but must be in an enclosing choreography. It is not extended from the enclosing choreography nor necessarily performed (from another choreography, location, etc.) although it could be. Note, one child may be or may not be restricted to use in a choreography package (the restriction is a constraint rather than evidence of the choreography or choreography fragment's construction). An example would be a loan assessor choreography that evaluates risk of guaranteeing a customer including a credit check. The loan assessment could be run as a separate choreography but in our particular scenario it must be run only in a bank loan application choreography because of constraints applied by the loan policies. Thanks.
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 13:38:36 UTC