- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:25:23 -0400
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <m2bpqnpnf0.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org> writes: > What is XProc? Is it: > > (a) A general utility for defining XML pipelines > > (b) An XML data flow language > > (c) An XML-based workflow language > > (d) An XML-based orchestration language > > (e) An XML-based process definition language It's all of the above, though I think it's more immediately suited for things closer to (a) than for things closer to (e). Because it's fairly general purpose and extensible, it's difficult to say there are things it can't do. It just isn't designed to make doing them easy. I almost commented, for example, on the BPEL comparison. It's true that none of the existing steps can "interact with people". But I could write a "wait for Joe in accounting to approve this PO" extension step that used email or XForms or SMS messages or whatever and then I could tune my XProc engine to run for long periods of time and then XProc would be able to "interact with people". That just wasn't a design goal. When I'm asked, I say XProc is a language for composing XML technologies: parsing, validation, XInclude, query, transformation, etc. Or words to that effect. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The perfect man has no method; or http://nwalsh.com/ | rather the best of methods, which is | the method of no-method.-- Shih-T'ao
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 12:26:09 UTC