RE: [wsbpel-abstract] where is the dividing line?

["Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>]

Time constraints are to be judged, of course, against priorities. And
different companies/customers have different priorities.

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nickolas Kavantzas [mailto:nickolas.kavantzas@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 11:46 AM
> To: Ugo Corda
> Cc: Rossomando, Philip; Monica J. Martin; 
> wsbpel-abstract@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsbpel-abstract] where is the dividing line?
> 
> 
> Kind of interesting that you are picking #3 as the use-case 
> for removing, based on time constraints.
> 
> Why then not remove use-case #1 or #2 based on time 
> constraints? I am not really sure how we can make this decision.
> 
> 
> By talking to Oracle's customers, we are hearing very strong 
> feedback for supporting use-case #3.
> 
> 
> Ugo Corda wrote:
> 
> > Forgot to give my reasoning: time constraints for 
> completion of our TC 
> > work.
> >
> > Ugo
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ugo Corda
> > > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 10:37 AM
> > > To: Rossomando, Philip; Monica J. Martin
> > > Cc: wsbpel-abstract@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: RE: [wsbpel-abstract] where is the dividing line?
> > >
> > >
> > > I would remove #3 for now, and focus on the "external 
> description" 
> > > cases. If in the end it turns out that whatever we come 
> up with can 
> > > also apply (without ANY additional work on our part) to 
> case 3, all 
> > > the better.
> > >
> > > Ugo
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Rossomando, Philip [mailto:Philip.Rossomando@unisys.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 10:27 AM
> > > > To: Monica J. Martin
> > > > Cc: wsbpel-abstract@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [wsbpel-abstract] where is the dividing line?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Good point Monica: Let's try to build a list. We'll add 
> and Then 
> > > > subtract from it until we reach consensus:
> > > >
> > > > My candidates are:
> > > >                             1. The Customer: You are trying to
> > > > convince                                       you understand
> > > > his/her business
> > > >                             2. Partners in the UDDI 
> manner suggested
> > > > by SAP:                                Here is how I 
> behave. If you
> > > > want to do business                                    with
> > > me, this is what
> > > > you will have to do.
> > > >                             3. Fellow developers/BPEL Executable
> > > > coders: Well
> > > >                                John, here is the 
> business process as
> > > > I                                      understand it. 
> You add the
> > > > details. I've added                                    some
> > > hints/ideas but
> > > > you fill in the blanks.
> > > >
> > > > Others?
> > > >
> > > > Now the rules of the game are. Add something but say 
> why. Remove 
> > > > something But explain your reasoning.
> > > >
> > > > Phil Rossomando
> > > >
> > > > Research Director, Technology & Architecture
> > > > Unisys Corporation
> > > > Unisys Way, B-330
> > > > Blue Bell, PA 19424 USA
> > > > Philip.rossomando@unisys.com
> > > > 215-986-3998
> > > > FAX 413-0215-2043
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:Monica.Martin@Sun.COM]
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 12:42 PM
> > > > To: Rossomando, Philip
> > > > Cc: Martin Chapman; wsbpel-abstract@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [wsbpel-abstract] where is the dividing line?
> > > >
> > > > Rossomando, Philip wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Martin:
> > > > >
> > > > >The point is I don't think it's a single dividing line. As you 
> > > > >mentioned there are different audiences. What I
> > > Personally see
> > > > >is a layered structure with a movement From very abstract
> > > to les and
> > > > >less abstract until you Are at an executable BPEL level.
> > > > >
> > > > >At the highest abstraction
> > > > >Level you may not only have syntactic abstraction but Also 
> > > > >semantic abstraction. Sort of writing on the back of A 
> napkin. At 
> > > > >the next level semantic abstraction may become
> > > > More crisp
> > > > >but syntax may still be open to say leaving Things out. This
> > > > would be
> > > > >like the total implicit approach Mentioned by Satish. This
> > > > level may be
> > > > >where partner communication Takes place.
> > > > >
> > > > >At the next level lower you may start to add place 
> Holders. Sort 
> > > > >of sign posts for coders. Here I would like To see 
> something. You 
> > > > >might even add comments with suggestions To a coder sort of 
> > > > >constraining expectations. Finally at the
> > > Lowest level
> > > > >you may have full blown executable BPEL.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > mm1: Phil, I think we could provide some parameters on 
> the level 
> > > > and extent of abstraction if we could agree on the 
> audience we are 
> > > > targeting
> > > >
> > > > (which hones our uses cases, business requirements, etc).
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> 
>