- From: Gary Brown <gary@pi4tech.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:40:34 +0100
- To: Pötscher <Michael.Poetscher@fh-joanneum.at>
- CC: public-ws-chor@w3.org
Hi Michael This mailing list is for questions and issues related to the WS-CDL specification. Issues related to a particular product should be directed to the vendor, or the pi4soa forums in this case. To address one of your points, the pi4soa tool presents a higher level view of the choreography information. This means that sometimes, information associated with the activities can be inferred rather than expecting the user to enter information multiple times - which can lead to inconsistencies. For example, the interaction's "to role" and "from role" can be inferred from the channel variable's channel type and the relationship type associated with the interaction. From a static perspective, two exchanges will be correlated by the fact that they are associated with the same channel variable. From a dynamic (runtime) perspective, the messages associated with those exchanges will only be correlated to the same choreography session (and therefore the same channel instance within that choreography session), if they have equivalent identity information - the identity information is defined on the ChannelType. Regards Gary Pötscher wrote: > > Hi 2 all! > > I am currently working on my diploma thesis about collaborative > business process description using WS-CDL. For the description of my > example process I use the eclipse plug-in pi4soa. My example process > is now in the state of a well formed WS-CDL document. > > Now I am evaluating the pi4soa generation of WS-BPEL documents out of > a WS-CDL description. On this point I have a problem to correlate > request and response messages. (screenshot) The red and green > interactions occur between different roles. How can I correlate them? > First I thought I can use the participant element within the > interactions element to set a “from” and “to” role, but it seems that > the WS-CDL file of the pi4soa tool differs in this part from the W3C > Candidate Recommendation 9 November 2005. > > However! Does anyone know how to solve this problem? > > Regards > > Mike > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >
Received on Friday, 30 June 2006 08:40:48 UTC