- From: Mine Altunay <maltuna@unity.ncsu.edu>
- Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 13:42:02 -0500 (EST)
- To: Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@pi4tech.com>
- cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Hello Steve Thank you so very much for the quick response. It completely answers my question. In fact, after receiving your email, I went back and read the ws-cdl draft document again and realized that I apparently missed the explanation for operation attribute of an interaction. Thank you very much Best Regards ....Mine Mine Altunay PhD candidate NC State University ECE Dept. On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Steve Ross-Talbot wrote: > Dear Mine, > > All interactions in WS-CDL define an operation name over a channel and > include a relationship name and the from and to roles for that interaction. > Optionally one may specify a set of exchanges (up to 3 normally, one for the > request, one for the response and one for a fault response). The operation > name may be used to tie back to a WSDL operation for the to role. If one > projects out all of the operations for a specific to role in a WS-CDL > description one would get an ordered set of of WSDL operations. The WS-CDL > defines the multi-party ordering and the end point projection provides the > specific role's ordering. > > In the definition of a role type in WS-CDL an optional interface can be > included. This may be a reference to a specific WSDL and this ties the role > to a specific service contract. > > Thus you always know which operation is invoked during an interaction because > the operation name and the to-role are defined. > > So I would say you are almost correct but that you missed the point about the > role being an abstract that has specific ordering constraints on the service > operations. Generally a role has a single behavior but that does not have to > be the case. > > If you want to find out further details carry on mailing this list but you > might want to cross post or look at the pi4soa implementation. > > Cheers > > Steve T > > On 1 Dec 2006, at 22:49, Mine Altunay wrote: > >> >> Dear list >> My understanding of current ws-cdl standard was that each role can have >> multiple behaviors and each behavior corresponds to an operation listed >> within a service's wsdl. As a result, I view a role as an abtraction that >> is a collection of service operations. Each time a different behavior is >> assumed by a role, the corresponding web service operation would be >> invoked. >> >> My confusion arises when I try to define interactions between different >> roles. An interaction consists of a relationship type and defines >> fromRoleTypes and toRoleTypes. However it does not specify which behaviors >> can be assumed during the specific interaction between two roles. >> >> My problem exacerbates when I try to tie in a choreography document with a >> run time execution environment. Since I do not know which operation is >> invoked during an interaction, determining run-time operation sequences >> between actual web service implementations is almost impossible. >> >> Can anyone enlighten me on this? am I incorrect to tie in behaviors with >> actual web services operations >> Thank you >> ....Mine >> >> >> >> Mine Altunay >> NC State Univ, Computer Eng Dept >> >> >> >> >> > > Mine Altunay NC State Univ, Computer Eng Dept
Received on Saturday, 2 December 2006 20:39:34 UTC