- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 23:19:27 -0400
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net] > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 9:07 PM > To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: Definition of Choreography > > > Champion, Mike wrote: > >... > > Thoughts anyone? > > Specifying the external interfaces (with or without time-based > sequencing) is a completely different problem than scripting a set of > web services to accomplish some task. For better or worse WSCI uses "choreography" to cover both. I do agree that it's becoming clear that we need to disentangle them. I *personally* [not wearing co-chair hat] am inclined to focus only on the defininition of the public interface to choreographed web services (and believe there a majority want to include time-based sequencing). As Paul says, some people will want to actually implement the choreographed web services in a scripting language, some will push for a BPEL-like language, etc. Just as WSDL just specifies the interface to a service and doesn't care how it's implemented, something analogous for "choreography" seems like the minimum needed to declare victory, at least for the "1.0" version.
Received on Saturday, 19 October 2002 23:19:28 UTC