- From: Haugen Robert <Robert.Haugen@choreology.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:04:45 -0000
- To: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
- Cc: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Monica J. Martin wrote: > > 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. BH2: "Child choreography" in Proposal 6 is an inheritance relationship. The result is single choreography merging features or parent and child. You're using "child choreography" in a different, but valid, sense. I adopted the words "parent" and "child" in proposal 6 because they did not exist in the CDL spec, and so I thought I could pre-empt their meaning-in-context. If not - if prop 6 passes and you wish to use "child" with a different meaning - we may need to negotiate or straw-vote. I'm open to other terms. Choreology Anti virus scan completed
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 14:05:19 UTC