RE: [wsbpel] Human editable BPEL?

[Rand Anderson <randerson@macgregor.com>]

+1, well said. This sums up what I think is the right approach on
requirements for us, given the charter of this TC, and that we're not
starting from scratch.

Rand

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 5:32 PM
> To: David RR Webber - XML ebusiness; Yaron Y. Goland
> Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Human editable BPEL?
> 
> 
> IMHO the requirements are pretty simple; review the 1.1 spec, 
> fix any bugs, resolve ambiguities, and if you want new stuff 
> or if you want to make radical changes propose new 
> requirements. I trust the originators of the spec itself to 
> have done the "meta" requirements exercise, for which BPEL4WS 
> 1.1 is the result.
> 
> Martin.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David RR Webber - XML ebusiness 
> [mailto:Gnosis_@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:34 AM
> > To: Yaron Y. Goland
> > Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Human editable BPEL?
> >
> >
> > Yaron,
> >
> > There's another aspect to this - BPEL is it seems primarily 
> intended 
> > to be used internally - with only a subset of the logic 
> being shared 
> > externally.
> >
> > But what if that logic (that you built in your IDE GUI) is not 
> > readable - or causes undesirable results - in the IDE GUI 
> of Product X 
> > - used by your partner?  Or your partners BPEL fragment causes bad 
> > results on your system? But the models look just lovely!
> >
> > You need to look at the raw XML to figure out why - and more to the 
> > point - interoperablity between products requires a simpler subset.
> >
> > Broken record - if we get back to the requirements - and if 
> > interoperability in this way is a key requirement - then simpler 
> > syntax, and also levels of conformance, are the way to go.
> >
> > Alternately you could just duck this whole issue by using something 
> > like BPSS to do the external coupling across processes.
> >
> > But we're still waiting for that unnamed graduate student 
> to produce 
> > for us the definative list of requirements - so we can be crystal 
> > clear on all this.  What was his name again?
> >
> > Thanks, DW. ===================================================
> > Message text written by "Yaron Y. Goland"
> > >
> > I remember in the late 1980s when everyone argued that 
> source code was 
> > dead and all programs would be written using UIs.
> >
> > I remember the early 1990s when everyone argued that no one 
> would ever 
> > directly author HTML.
> >
> > I also remember the late 1990s when everyone (myself included =( 
> > )argued that it didn't matter if XML was human editable 
> since everyone 
> > would use tools.
> >
> > It's funny how often everyone is wrong.
> >
> >         Just a thought,
> >                         Yaron
> > <
> >
> >
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>