- From: Adomas Svirskas <adomas@svirskas.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 04:18:15 +0300
- To: Sergey Kim <sergey.kim@lut.fi>
- CC: public-ws-chor@w3.org
- Message-ID: <442C8357.2090504@svirskas.com>
Hi Sergey, If one asks a question about "WS composition in action" it is important to realise that there two main types of WS composition: *master/slave* and *peer-to-peer*. These types, while having different areas of applicability, are not mutually exclusive, quite opposite is true, in fact - master/slave composition of basically primitive services yields coarse grain services, which can be composed in peer-to-peer manner for some meaningful unit of collaborative work (e.g. B2B collaborations) to occur. One can also think of master/slave composition (plus ordered message exchange, of course) as of implementation of peer-to-peer composition (business protocols). The peer-to-peer one is called *choreography* and the master/slave composition is called *orchestration*, as you perhaps know. The former describes an interaction protocol (sequence of messages to be exchanged simply speaking) to be enacted by the peers without any central entity governing the collaboration - this is a global view of the peers; interaction. A language specification for this task (WS-CDL) is currently being finalised by this working group. The latter defines an executable process - control and data flow between Web services, which is supposed to be enacted by an orchestration engine (master) engaging the services (slaves) to achieve a business process. It is a single participant's view of the world. WS-BPEL is the main vehicle for this type of composition. There is a number of more in-depth explanations about the difference of these two approaches, for example: "Orchestration and Choreography: Standards, Tools and Technologies for Distributed Workflows" - http://www.nettab.org/2005/docs/NETTAB2005_Ross-TalbotOral.pdf and http://www.nettab.org/2005/docs/NETTAB2005_Ross-Talbot.pdf. Traditionally choreography is compared with a ballet script to be followed by the dancers independently and the orchestration is compared with a score used by an orchestra conductor. If you want a more down-to-earth and easier association - here is a good one, I think - http://blog.whatfettle.com/archives/000250.html The art of heavy lifting is how to make sure that both types of composition can work together in real world deployments. Since you sent your message to a choreography mailing list, let me start with the tools for choreography support- there is an open source toolkit Pi4SOA (www.pi4soa.org) produced by Pi4Tech company based in the UK (www.pi4tech.com), which allows to model, validate, verify choreography scripts using WS-CDL and then generate end-point stubs for subsequent deployment by the collaboration participants. The end points may use orchestration tools (potentially WS-BPEL based) to model and enact the choreography protocol. There is no shortage of WS-BPEL tools - just google around.. Again, there is a problem of adaptive choreography protocol support by the end-points - the latter should be able to accommodate the changes of "global" protocols without major software rewriting. Some overview of this problem is presented in this paper: http://www.mif.vu.lt/~adam/iadis-wbc-2006/IADIS-WBC-2006-paper-Svirskas-camera.pdf I hope this helps - I would advise to start with the Pi4SOA tools to describe some protocol in WS-CDL and then enact it using WS-BPEL, for example. Best regards, Adomas Svirskas Researcher Vilnius University, Lithuania Kingston University London, UK Sergey Kim wrote: > Hello people, > > > > I am doing my thesis work that is titled "Web Service composition". In > this connection, I would like to ask you: Is there any real > implementation of Web Services and WS composition. There are only lots > of assumptions where it could be used. Where can I feel or touch the > system, or even try to use it in practice? > > > > Thanks a lot, > > Sergey >
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 01:18:30 UTC