WSDL / BPSS proposal

Discussion|oasis.ebBP;

Topic|WSDL;

Point|Intoduction;

||Following our discussion at the f2f meeting, here is my proposal for

||extending BPSS to support WSDL operations

JJD@

This proposal is based on WSDL 2.0. Even though this specification is still about 9 months before it becomes a W3C recommendation, it is very stable at this point as we are approaching the last call.

We introduce in BPSS a new activity type called OperationActivity, that performs like a BusinessTransactionActivity or a CollaborationActivity

An OperationActivity references an operation within a WSDL interface.

@JJD

Point|Schema;

JJD@

The schema introduces two new elements:

<OperationDefinition

name="xs:NCName"

guid="xs:anyURi" >

fromRole="xs:string" >

toRole="xs:string" >

fromRoleGUIDREF="GUIDREF" >

toRoleGUIDREF="GUIDREF" >

<InitiatingOperation

name="xs:NCName"

guid="xs:anyURi" >

interface="xs:string" >

name="xs:string" >

namespace="xs:anyURI" >

<documentation />?

</InitiatingOperation >

<RespondingOperation

name="xs:NCName"

guid="xs:anyURi" >

interface="xs:string" >

name="xs:string" >

namespace="xs:anyURI" >

<documentation />?

</RespondingOperation >

<documentation />?

</OperationDefinition>

<OperationActivity

name="xs:NCName"

guid="xs:anyURi" >

timeToPerform="xs:duration" >

isConcurrent="xs:boolean" >

beginsWhen="xs:string" >

endsWhen="xs:string" >

preCondition="xs:string" >

postCondition="xs:string" >

</Process>

The model is a bit different from BT / BTA since an operation definition cannot be inverted (from/to role). This is why the definition features fromRole and toRole and not the operationActicity.

An interface is referenced both in the initiating operation and the responding operation. These two operations have to be exact mirrors of each other.

Any fault is by definition generating a Business Failure (equivalent to isPositiveResponse = false)

Similarly WSDL features of the references interface allow us to assert the value of these attributes: isAuthenticated, isConfidential and isTamperDetectable

I will publish a mapping between WSDL features and these values as soon as I can find a description of the features.

@JJD

Point|Other approaches;

JJD@
I don’t think we need to wrap WSDL messages in Document envelopes. WSDL features are often defined at the interface level (which I think is better granularity than at the document envelope level). Of course I understand why it is defined at the document envelope level, maybe BPSS could have a dual approach with default values for these parameters and overwrite whenever necessary. This could greatly simplify the reading of BPSS instances.

@JJD

||Hope that helps,

||Cheers

||JJ

ebxml-bp message