[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: comment question
Eric asks: [Would
it be better to say that the context captures or reflects the semantics
of the
Web service(s) executing within the activity rather than that the
semantics are
defined by the specifications? The specifications define the way in
which the
context reflects the semantics of the activity, rather than vice versa? I had always thought of the definition of an
Activity as the same as the scope of context sharing, and the context
reflected
the semantics of the activity:...] To which I have a few questions: 1) are these mutually exclusive? 2) does a context reflect semantics when a service chooses to ignore the context? I'm expecting that the backend of the service is required to respect some predefined semantic iff their exist a definition of the semantic and rules for which it is applied. Both require a specification. Put another way, I agree that the context reflects the semantics of the activity, but I think the definition of the semantic expectations of the operation invocation cannot be established without reference to some highter authority. Or am I missing the point? Greg |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]