Re: [wsbpel] Groups - BPEL4WS 1.1 Issues Log May 23.doc uploaded

[Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@enigmatec.net>]

Easy to say and sounds like a form of bi-simulation, which is not so 
easy to do.

Cheers

Steve T

On Thursday, May 29, 2003, at 04:48  pm, Ugo Corda wrote:

> Well, I guess it depends on how we define portability in the context 
> of BPEL.
>
> One definition of BPEL portability could be the following: to be able 
> to take a BPEL executable process that works in a particular 
> environment, run it in a different environment (different BPEL engine, 
> different WSDL end points), and obtain the same observable behavior in 
> the new environment.
>
> If we take this definition, it seems to me that BPEL portability 
> should be one of the main reasons for creating the standard, and 
> should be one of the major goals to be achieved by this TC.
>
> Ugo
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edwin Khodabakchian [mailto:edwink@collaxa.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 8:15 AM
>> To: Ugo Corda; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Groups - BPEL4WS 1.1 Issues Log May 23.doc
>> uploaded
>>
>>
>> I was trying to make 2 points:
>>
>> 1) BPEL's interoperability is a Web service interoperability problem.
>>
>> 2) Portability on the other side is a true BPEL problem. SQL had some
>>    of the same portability promisses. It delivered huge value to the
>>    enterprise while not delivering 100% code portability.
>>
>> Edwin
>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 6:25 AM
>>> To: edwink@collaxa.com; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>
>>>> - We should have interoperability out of the box through Web
>>>>   service interfaces
>>>
>>> That could be more complicated depending on which WSDL
>>> binding we are considering. So far I have not seen any
>>> constraint in BPEL for WSDL to be limited to the standard W3C
>>> bindings (SOAP, or HTTP, or MIME).
>>>
>>> Even considering WSDL SOAP binding only, then it is an issue
>>> of whether we are considering SOAP over HTTP, or some other
>>> popular but proprietary bindings (e.g. to a JMS provider).
>>>
>>> Or are you thinking of a different type of interoperability?
>>>
>>> Ugo
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>

This email is confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy or disclose its content but  delete the email and contact the sender immediately. Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails we are not liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to run their own antivirus software.