OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-caf message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [ws-caf] discussion on approaches for web services/ business transaction


Bob,

Again, I have to apologize for not agreeing that there's an issue, or perhaps just not understanding that there's an issue.  

The sub-protocols represent existing environments and potentially new environments that need to be bridged for the simple reason that all environments (current and potential) do not use the same protocol.  

The ACID and LRA tranasaction models in WS-TXM are optional, as is the BP model.  So the ACID and LRA protocols can be sub-protocols to the BP model, as can legacy protocols, WS-T, or BTP.  The ACID, LRA, and BP protocols are not required.  They do not replace anything, and are intended as complementary protocols instead of replacement protocols.

I'm sorry, but I still do not see the issue.  This is how WS-CAF is designed.

Thanks,

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: Haugen Robert [mailto:Robert.Haugen@choreology.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 12:38 PM
To: Newcomer, Eric; WS-CAF
Subject: RE: [ws-caf] discussion on approaches for web services/
business transaction


Eric Newcomer wrote:
> the point of WS-CAF is to define a protocol complementary 
> to the lower level protocols, not a replacement for them.  

I can understand that assertion re WS-Context and WS-CF (Coordination),
but the issue Peter and I and others have raised is about WS-TXM.

When I read WS-TXM, I see a suite of new business transaction protocols:
ACID, LRA and BP, where BP itself decomposes into a suite of
sub-protocols.

How do I correlate the suite of new protocols in WS-TM with your
statement above?


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]