- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 11:01:58 -0400
- To: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF9536243E.7F9E29DF-ON85256C13.0050ADF7-85256C13.00527FF0@rchland.ibm.com>
Paul, I never claimed that they solved the same problem. It is my understanding that WSCI could be used as a means of providing an external/public representation of an interface to an EDOC business process. You would have to discuss this with the WSCI authors. I do know that Karsten Riemer of Sun, one of the authors of the WSCI spec, was actively engaged in both the ebXML BP and OMG EDOC efforts and had a specific objective of aligning the two such that they complemented one another. I believe that he had a similar goal of alignment for WSCI. My point was that you claimed that the OMG never felt the need for "choreography". I believe that the EDOC RFP belies your claim. Cheers, Christopher Ferris Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com phone: +1 508 234 3624 Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net> wrote on 08/12/2002 10:28:07 AM: > Christopher B Ferris wrote: > > > >... > > > > Actually, the OMG (aka CORBA people) do feel they need a "choreography > > language". It's called EDOC[1]. It is needed for many of the same reasons > > as Geoff cites in one of his responses to this thread (e.g. the trend > > towards public v private semantics). > > I can't see how EDOC and WSCI solve the same problem in their respective > architectures. Could you please enlighten me? > > -- > "When I walk on the floor for the final execution, I'll wear a denim > suit. I'll walk in there like Willie Nelson, John Wayne, Will Smith > -- Men in Black -- James Brown. Maybe do a Michael Jackson moonwalk." > Congressman James Traficant.
Received on Monday, 12 August 2002 11:11:25 UTC