- From: Nickolas Kavantzas <nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 10:18:20 -0700
- To: "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>, "Nobuko Yoshida" <yoshida@doc.ic.ac.uk>
- Cc: "'WS-Choreography List'" <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Regarding my concrete use-cases and proposal please look at the links below that point to my messages sent to Gary/Steve and the public Choreo list: 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Apr/0010.html 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Apr/0022.html 3) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Apr/0029.html 4) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Apr/0035.html Best Regards, -- Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net> To: "'WS-Choreography List'" <public-ws-chor@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 12:23 AM Subject: Fwd: Co-relation on channels. > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > From: "Kohei Honda" <kohei_honda@ntlworld.com> > > Date: 5 May 2005 01:08:51 BST > > To: "Nickolas Kavantzas" <nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com>, "Gary Brown" > > <gary@pi4tech.com> > > Cc: "Steve Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net>, "Nobuko Yoshida" > > <yoshida@doc.ic.ac.uk>, "Marco Carbone" <carbonem@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>, > > "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> > > Subject: Re: Co-relation on channels. > > Reply-To: "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> > > > > Nobuko and I are happy that our note is found to be possibly useful for > > Choreo public in general. Sometimes it can be confusing when we refer > > to the pi-calculus etc., without enough elaboration. However perhaps > > this is the time when we should accelerate our concerted efforts by > > increasing bandwidth. > > > > I note both Nobuko and I are very positive about Gary's proposal, even > > if this may not be so clear from our text. On this assumption the note > > lists > > several points we considered may deserve discussions. Among the five > > points given, we believe (a)(b)(e) can be easily clarified through > > pertinent > > examples. As to (d) we could not so far find a concrete proposal: > > perhaps > > Nick can clarify this point. (c) may need a formal analysis. > > > > To WG members and others in this list: the co-relation is not only > > useful for > > static/dynamic analysis, but also may be used as a basic element for > > structuring choreography description. Examples of using this notion > > will > > serve as a precious basis upon which its design can be refined and made > > robust. > > > > kohei > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Nickolas Kavantzas" <nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com> > > To: "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>; "Gary Brown" > > <gary@pi4tech.com> > > Cc: "Steve Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net>; "Nobuko Yoshida" > > <yoshida@doc.ic.ac.uk>; "Marco Carbone" <carbonem@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>; > > "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 11:53 PM > > Subject: Re: Co-relation on channels. > > > > > >> Based on Steve's request that conversations with Kohei/Nobuko should > >> be > >> visible also to the Choreo public > >> list, I think that this thread should be forwarded to the Choreo > >> public list > >> as well and subsequently any more > >> discussions should be done there. > >> > >> -- > >> Nick > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Kohei Honda" <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> > >> To: "Gary Brown" <gary@pi4tech.com> > >> Cc: "Nickolas Kavantzas" <nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com>; "Steve > >> Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net>; "Nobuko Yoshida" > >> <yoshida@doc.ic.ac.uk>; > >> "Marco Carbone" <carbonem@dcs.qmul.ac.uk>; "Kohei Honda" > >> <kohei@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 6:37 AM > >> Subject: Co-relation on channels. > >> > >> > >>> Dear Gary, Nick and Steve, > >>> > >>> Nobuko and I have agreed on how we can view your co-relation > >>> proposal, on which I attach a note in this mail. I hope this > >>> note is useful for further discussions on this point. > >>> > >>> Best wishes, > >>> > >>> kohei > >>> > >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> ------ > >> ---- > >> > >> > >>> Brief Comments on Outline Proposal for Issue 1001. > >>> > >>> Kohei Honda (Queen Mary) > >>> Nobuko Yoshida (Imperial College) > >>> > >>> (1) general. > >>> > >>> We consider it is a good idea to have an explicit declaration of > >>> a logical session. This will help static analyses of various > >>> properties including dead/livelock detections. > >>> > >>> In the pi-calculus, we only have channels, so we may use channels > >>> and their chaining to make the session explicit. > >>> > >>> This proposal identifies session information through "identity" > >>> token value associated with a channel instance. > >>> > >>> Identity can be primary/derived/association/alternate. > >>> > >>> It is considered that multiple threads of interactions using multiple > >>> instances of multiple channel types may possibly refer to the same > >>> session via these identity values. > >>> > >>> Overall we believe incorporating this notion will have positive > >>> interaction with "linearity" and other constraints. > >>> > >>> (2) concrete points. > >>> > >>> (a) We cannot see why identification of a session needs to > >>> incorporate > >>> the ordering of tokens (the last line of the first para of "Possible > >>> Solution"). Unless necessary it may be better not to use ordering > >>> info. > >>> > >>> (b) We cannot see the need of "alternate". This may complicate static > >>> checking unless very clearly declared that it is an alias of a > >>> primary > >>> ID (aliases are in general troublesome). If not necessary, we hope > >>> this can be taken off. > >>> > >>> (c) We believe when a channel is passed, its associated usage value > >>> should also be passed. Channel instances are real interaction points > >>> (say URIs), while identity tokens offer corelations. As in type > >>> passing in lambda/pi-calculi, it is consistent to send this info > >>> together with a channel. So this may be made mandatory. > >>> > >>> (d) We could not check in detail the differences between Gary's > >>> original proposal and Nick's one. This seems design issues rather > >>> than logical issues, so it would be good to decide if we need > >>> this functionality first. Then we can examine, through many > >>> examples, the best way to write them down. > >>> > >>> (e) In pi, we have new name generation to generate a session. Since > >>> the same binding mechanism does not exist in CDL, some counterpart > >>> (a notation for random ID generation as well as a way to read it > >>> from a role instance's state) may be incorporated. > >>> > >>> We are happy to have further discussions on this topic. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > >
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2005 17:18:45 UTC