[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Groups - 2003-09-18.BTM.BPEL.syntax.summary.ppt uploaded
I also had the impression that the term "transaction" is used on our list referring alternatively to the two different things you mention below. I think we should pick two different names for them and use them consistently, otherwise discussions can get very confusing. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Furniss, Peter [mailto:Peter.Furniss@choreology.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:45 AM > To: David RR Webber; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Groups - 2003-09-18.BTM.BPEL.syntax.summary.ppt > uploaded > > > David, > > thanks. > but .. > > Your suggestion for type makes me uncertain certain we're thinking of > "transaction" in quite the same way. > > I can envisage properties of a transaction, and the need to > specify them > ( sub-issue is how much is in the bpel proper and how much by > configuration - actually this relates to the general > strategic issue of > how much goes in the portable bpel and how much in the perhaps > not-so-portable immediate environment (cf issue 11 > discussion)). but I'd > thought of those as being things like "atomic" versus "selective", or > timelimits or "ws-atomic" v "ws-caf(lra)". This possibility > is mentioned > in our earlier text input, but I didn't include it in the examples in > the ppt. Your "type" values (and some of the other fields > you suggest) > make me wonder if you are thinking of transaction in the sense of > roughly "a defined multi-party pattern of interaction" - what > I think is > considered as "a choreography" in Another Place. I was thinking of > business transaction in sense of an equivalent of a classic ACID > transaction as applied to the (usually) more loosely-coupled world of > web-services - a set of interactions that are subject to a common > decision to complete or reverse (see Alastair's presentation > for better > and perhaps more comprehensble descriptions). Both, by history, are > reasonable meanings of "business transaction", but they are > really quite > different. > > Our proposal was concerned with the ability for bpel processes to > initiate, control, propagate and participate in business transactions > where a supporting generic protocol communicated whether the entities > should complete their work, or parts of it positively (confirmed, > finally completed) or negatively (cancelled, compensated). > That could be > a component or aspect of some of independently defined > interactions, but > is essential orthogonal to such questions. > > It may be I've completely misunderstood and you are talking about > exactly the same kind of beast as I am, but with different > names for the > parts. In which case, sorry. (but I really don't understand threadID) > > Peter > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info] > > Sent: 24 September 2003 18:44 > > To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org; Furniss, Peter > > Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Groups - > > 2003-09-18.BTM.BPEL.syntax.summary.ppt uploaded > > > > > > Peter, > > > > I've just reviewed your PPT - looks a good start point. What > > I'd like to add to the consideration is the following bullet > > points that add ability to point to transaction properties:: > > > > - name of transaction > > - type - XML/EDI/UBL/BOD et al > > - URL to definition (schema or CAM template) > > - version > > - context URL (points to XML that contains context) > > - threadID (optional - where applicable) > > > > Thanks, DW. > > > > > Document Description: > > > Proposed changes to BPEL to support Business Transaction > > management - > > Peter Furniss & Tony Fletcher presentation > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from > the roster of the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/le ave_workgroup.php.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]