W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > October 2002

RE: Definition of Choreography

From: Mathews, Walden <walden.mathews@tfn.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 07:57:46 -0400
Message-ID: <1373D6342FA1D4119A5100E029437F64045EEE1D@clifford.devo.ilx.com>
To: "'Paul Prescod '" <paul@prescod.net>, "'David Orchard '" <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: "''bhaugen' '" <linkage@interaccess.com>, "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>


>I strongly agree. So that's why I'm wondering how is:
>preconditions + postconditions + state machines
>better (simpler, faster, in ANY WAY BETTER) than
>preconditions + postconditions
>I don't get it.

There's a lot of overlap in that.

A state is a set of (pre) conditions.  A guard is just a small
elaboration of a precondition.  All that's left is the event
(trigger).  Are you saying that the mention of events in such
a model adds an unacceptable complexity?  I wouldn't think so.

I think the "state machine" is closer to what you are proposing
than it is to the procedural alternative.

Received on Sunday, 20 October 2002 07:58:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:05:41 UTC