[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] implicite links of the runtime engine (was: Implicit <sequence> macro)
I expect we'll see more and more automatic analysis of abstract BPEL processes over time. This is already becoming a topic of interest in the research community. Of course it will be important for humans to understand these processes, but their usage won't be limited to that. Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: Eckenfels. Bernd [mailto:B.Eckenfels@seeburger.de] > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:24 AM > To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] implicite links of the runtime engine > (was: Implicit <sequence> macro) > > Hello Maciej, > > > I'd argue that the distinction between executable and abstract is > > really quite small. Both executable and abstract process will be > > "executed", either by a "real" machine implementing the physical > > side-effects of the reductions implied by the process definition in > > the context of the physical environment, or by a machine > that attempts > > to determine the bisimilarity of two BPEL processes. > Consequently, I see the value of constructs such as > "sequence" to be unaffected by the abstractness of the process. > > Well, the target audience is creatly different. The abstract > process is more often used as a mean of communicating between > business partners to set up the process. This means, it will > be analysed and "parsed" by humans (with tools support). It > should contain rationale and easy to understand patterns. > > This is more relevant for the requirements discussion (add > documentation, versioning, derivation support), but it also > may be a an reason for keep sequences: it is used to express > the intention of the modeler to other humans, not the sematic > of the process to the engine. > > Greetings > Bernd > -- > www.seeburger.com >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]