[bt-spec] Web Service Architecture Usage Scenarios from the W3C

[Mark Potts <mark.potts@talkingblocks.com>]

Hey,

Section 2.21 S080 Transactions of the Web Service Architecture Usage
Scenarios Draft does not at this time state requirements but does  includes:
2.21.3.3 Candidate Technologies and names OASIS BTP. This is good!

There has already been some discussion from the ebXMl folks saying that they
have a transaction protocol in BPSS - quote -  "Once again, ebXML BPSS not
only has a transaction protocol, but also a clear definition of what
transactions mean in a B2B context: not database transactions, but
state-alignment" This is bad, if you take the inference to DB transactions
to be aimed at BTP and branding it as a 2pc acid type transaction protocol.

I would say that a good direction for future work would be to help define
the scenarios with W3C and ensure that BTP supports these scenarios includes
any requirements they may have such that BTP could be part of the W3C's Web
Services Reference Architecture ...
back to interoperability!

If we think this is a good idea I suggest someone from the TC start thinking
about how we can participate in the effort to define the requirements. The
author is David Orchard of BEA and as such it may make sense for a BEA TC
member to start this, if we think its worth doing at this time!

Cheers

-----Original Message-----
From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 5:18 PM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org; www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Web Service Architecture Usage Scenarios editors copy available


Hi all,

The first cut at the WSArch Usage Scenarios is at
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/wd-wsawg-scenarios-05012002.html

I've done a fair bit of work on this document.  Of particular note:

- Merged as best I could with web services scenarios.  Separate email on
this.
- Added many scenarios
- Renumbered scenarios.  There's a small section explaining the renumbering
- Added requirements, non-requirements, candidate technologies,
priority/effort sections to many scenarios
- Took a first swag at filling in some of the reqs/techs/priority sections.

Over time, we will extract the reqs/techs/priority sections.  Some of us -
well, mostly me and the other editors went along so blame me - wanted to
have all the information relating to a usage scenario in one spot, for ease
of reading and discussing/brainstorming.

I kept the xmlp diagrams, though over time I expect they will be changed to
be more suitable for the overall ws activity.

I've probably made a whole bunch of serious w3c publishing guidelines
errors, so be patient as Hugo, Chris and others help me along...  There are
also many things left to be done with the document, think of this as a first
draft.

Cheers,
Dave