- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:05:49 -0600
- To: "'Jeff Mischkinsky'" <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Looks pretty good to me. However, I honestly do not understand the last sentence at all. I'm not disagreeing with it, I'm just not getting it. Is there some way that you can recast or expand it to make it more clear? Maybe I should try to be more explicit about my confusion, if that is possible. In this sentence I don't understand what "standards context" means. Using or makinfg standards? Does "specification of choreographies" mean specifying techniques of expressing choreographies or specific instances of choreographies (like "A sends an invoice to B")? In either case, what does it mean to be interoperable and what is the value? Is this interoperable between Oracle and IBM or between W3C and OASIS? I think, from the discussion on the phone, that it may be the latter. If so, I really think that this needs to be explained more clearly and the actual area of value added explicitly pointed out. So far, "reduce the cost of integrating with new trading partners and responding to changes in existing interfaces [that effect the logic of the message exchanges]" is the core of the business value I am seeing displayed. Are there any other payouts? It really seems to me that there might be, but I'm not coming up with anything real specific. As it stands, it seems to me that this business value may be achieved by a rather small subset of the complex specs in play. That is, what I would call (probably not very accurately) the message sequencing part. -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Mischkinsky [mailto:jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:59 AM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: additional para from 31 oct telecon Hi, Here's my attempt to capture today's discussion centering around adding a description of the business drivers for developing a choreography spec. This goes right before Section 1.1 - Inputs cheers, jeff WSDL has proved very useful for describing a single service. Currently complex natural language describing the obligations of the participants detailing how to use a service (sequencing, state management, etc.) have to accompany a WSDL description. The next step is to partially replace these somewhat imprecise instructions with precise language. This will simplify the daunting task companies now face when trying to use web services to integrate their business processes. In a B2B context such a specification could reduce the cost of integrating with new trading partners and responding to changes in existing interfaces. In a standards context it will allow the development of specifications of choreographies in sufficient detail to enable interoperable implementations.
Received on Friday, 1 November 2002 11:06:23 UTC