[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] [issue:structure] draft 07, sect 2, line 201, Figure 2-1
Wouldn't the sequence of requests and responses be part of the
contract?
Michael
At 08:39 PM 5/20/2005, Duane Nickull
wrote:
>Oui Monsieur!
>
>Michael Stiefel
wrote:
>
>>I understand.
>>
>>So in a concrete
architecture, the appropriate Message Exchange Patterns
>>would go
here.
>>
>>Michael
>>
>>At 07:50 PM
5/20/2005, Duane Nickull wrote:
>>
>>>Model
1:
>>>
>>>You must send in an invocation request, and
the service will send you
>>>several responses until you cancel them
with another service cancel request
>>>
>>>Model
2:
>>>
>>>You invoke a service once and it gives you one
response, then all
is
>>>stopped.
>>>
>>>etc...
>>>
>>>Does
that capture it
Frank?
>>>
>>>Duane
>>>
>>>Michael
Stiefel wrote:
>>>
>>>>Just so I understand, could
you give me a concrete example of the
>>>>processing model for a
service?
>>>>
>>>>Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>At
06:48 PM 5/20/2005, Francis McCabe
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>No, a processing model applies
to each process
independently.
>>>>>Frank
>>>>>
>>>>>On
May 20, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Michael Stiefel
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I agree that a
processing model is
important.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nonetheless,
how does a processing model fit into a single
service.
>>>>>>Does not a processing model imply more than
one service?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>At one point
people were distinguishing a POA from a
SOA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>At
06:18 PM 5/20/2005, Francis McCabe
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Duane:
>>>>>>>1.
Process model as in WSDL/BPEL/CDL etc. The order of
actions
>>>>>>>against a service is at least as
important as the data exchanged.
>>>>>>>2. Yes,
contracts are dependent on
policies
>>>>>>>Frank
>>>>>>>P.S.
Good work. However painful it may seem, the process is
proving
>>>>>>>lightning fast. Perhaps there is more
agreement on SOAs than on
Web
>>>>>>>Services:)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On
May 20, 2005, at 3:05 PM, Duane Nickull
wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Frank:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thank
you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Francis
McCabe
wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I
would prefer to see
>>>>>>>>>1. policy, contract
linked together -- reflecting
the
>>>>>>>>>contract=agreed policy
idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>DN
- would it be fair to state that a contract is dependent upon
a
>>>>>>>>policy? I think this is in alignment
with the thinking from
the
>>>>>>>>F2F.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>2.
data model is one of the constraint types, like policy
and
>>>>>>>>>contract.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>DN
- that makes
sense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>3.
we should also mention process model if we are going to
call
>>>>>>>>>out the data
model.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>DN
- pertaining to the process of the service, not
multiple
>>>>>>>>services I presume? For
example - the way WSDL can describe the
>>>>>>>>I/ O
charateristics of a specific
service??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I
may whip up CoreRM7.png
shortly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Duane
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]