RE: Addressing Orchestration

Addressing OrchestrationBEA certainly believes that choreography is a high
priority area for standardization.  I slightly abused editorial privilege
and put high priority on the choreography usage scenario, but there's been
zero comments on the details of the usage scenarios or the priorities.

FWIW, there's fair bits of work to muddle through for requirements for any
real work in this area, like: should it be pi calculus (or derivative)
based?  should it have a global model?  should it specify correlations based
upon message content?  Should it be binary or n-ary meps (message exchange
patterns)?  What does conformance/compliance to an interface *mean* for
runtime software(should it check conditions?)?  What kinds of specifiable
meps are allowed?  What kind of extensibility model for defined interface
elements should be used?  How should the allowable meps relate to ordered
reliable messaging?  etc.

But, we can't even get to talking about requirements for security, despite
agreeing 2 months ago to focus on it as a high priority and it being listed
as a high priority area for soap extensions in the web services workshop
over a year ago.  So I'm not surprised that we haven't spent much time on
choreography.  </disappointment>

We'd certainly like to see more work on standardization around choreography.

Cheers,
Dave
  -----Original Message-----
  From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Ugo Corda
  Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 6:05 PM
  To: 'www-ws-arch@w3.org'
  Subject: Addressing Orchestration


  Hi everyone,

  Since I just joined the WSA WG, I thought of warming up for the task by
asking a question prompted by the recent publication of the WSCI
spec(http://wwws.sun.com/software/xml/developers/wsci/).

  It looks like Orchestration/Choreography/Workflow proposals relevant to
Web Services are proliferating in the industry. The ones that come to my
mind are IBM's WSFL, Microsoft's XLANG, BPMI's BPML, ebXML's BPSS, HP's
WSCL, and now WSCI.

  My hope is that clarity will soon be made in this important area(s) of Web
Services utilization. As usual, lack of clarity increases the risks of slow
adoption of, or resistance to, Web Services technologies in many parts of
the industry.

  I wonder if WSA could play a role in this area, at least from the point of
view of establishing a conceptual and architectural framework within which
the various proposals can be positioned, discussed, compared and selected.
(Please understand that I am not talking about discussing specific proposals
and/or establishing profiles, a role which is already being played by other
organizations, e.g. WS-I).

  I looked at the Requirements document and it does not seem to mention
Orchestration or use any similar word. Browsing through the archives of this
WG, I see that the subject of Orchestration has been raised a few times in
the past, but my impression is that no final decision was reached regarding
whether or how to address it. If that is the case, the recent publication of
yet another Orchestration spec could be the opportunity for the WG to put a
stake in the ground in this particular area.

  Regards,
  Ugo



  Dr. Ugo Corda
  Standards and Product Strategies
  SeeBeyond Technology Corporation
  404 E. Huntington Dr., Monrovia, CA 91016
  (626) 471-6045 -- phone
  (626) 353-4851 -- cell
  (626) 471-6021 -- fax