[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0
Bernd, I think my request for BP-compliant UC artifacts is completely compatible with the needs you mention below. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Eckenfels. Bernd [mailto:B.Eckenfels@seeburger.de] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 12:07 PM > To: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > > Hello, > > Ugo: I would still be very much in favor of our Use > Cases WSDL artifacts to be compliant with BP 1.0. > > Actually I think we need both: clean+smart WSDL files which > are re-used often for demonstration and explanation use. > > But we also need real+heavy examples, so we can use them as a > testing tool to verify our design in real world. For example > we might recognize, that a assign component with hundreds of > copy statements realy look mean :) > > I would liek to see e.g. a xCBL Purchase Order with a multi > megabyte XML Schema Definition as well as Interface > descriptions of some interfaces of the major ERP systems. It > would be especially cool, if we have the same business > document modeled for each represented EIS vendor here. > > Greetings > Bernd > > Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:33 AM > To: Ugo Corda; Prasad Yendluri; Eckenfels. Bernd > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > > I guess I am not seeing why we need to take on this problem - > RPC encoded or literal does not matter to the BPEL process. > If someone is policing WSDL 1.1 usage let them enforce that. > We can recommend BP 1.0 compliance for interop but if BPEL is > used in environments where BP 1.0 is not feasible or needed, > what does it mean for us to forbid the usage? > > > > > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:28 AM > To: Satish Thatte; Prasad Yendluri; Eckenfels. Bernd > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > Right, RPC literal would be fine, but RPC encoded would be in > violation. > -----Original Message----- > From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:23 AM > To: Ugo Corda; Prasad Yendluri; Eckenfels. Bernd > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > So for instance the RPC encoded services bound to SOAP/HTTP > would be in the "in scope but in violation" category? > > > > > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:18 AM > To: Satish Thatte; Prasad Yendluri; Eckenfels. Bernd > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > Let me clarify point 4 (sorry, I mislabeled it as 3) in > relation to point 1. > > I think we should distinguish services that are not compliant > with BP 1.0 from those that are simply out of scope for BP 1.0. > > If I have a Web service that is not bound to SOAP/HTTP, then > I would say it is out of scope for BP 1.0, so it's OK for > BPEL to interact with it. > > My point 4 is about services that are within the scope of BP > 1.0 and still do not comply with its requirements. > > Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:09 AM > To: Ugo Corda; Prasad Yendluri > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > I doubt that we can mandate BPEL to be used with BP 1.0 > compliant services only especially given the answer to 1 > assuming it is correct, and given that there are many > services today that are not compliant (e.g., RPC encoded ones). > > > > > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 10:55 AM > To: Satish Thatte; Prasad Yendluri > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > I see a few separate issues/questions connected to the > relationship of BP 1.0 and BPEL. > > 1- Would BP 1.0 be restricting BPEL to the point that some of > BPEL's functionality would not be available? > > I cannot think of any such restriction off the top of my head. > > 2- Would the fact that BP 1.0 only addresses the SOAP/HTTP > binding imply that also BPEL should be limited to that type > of binding? > > I don't think that anybody would imply that. > > 3- Should a BPEL process be offered as a Web service that is > BP 1.0 compliant? > > My answer would be yes. > > 3- Would it be fair to limit BPEL use to interacting with BP > 1.0 compliant Web services only? > > My personal answer would be yes. But I am a member of WS-I, > and I understand other people might have different answers. > > > Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 10:39 AM > To: Prasad Yendluri > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > For the benefit of the non-expert could post a salient > example please? Specifically, a BPEL usage pattern that > would not work if BP 1.0 is followed but would work if any > WSDL 1.1 portType is allowed. In other words, is BP 1.0 a > restriction on the WSDL artifacts we use or potentially on > BPEL itself? > > > > > From: Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 10:11 AM > To: Satish Thatte > Cc: BPEL OASIS > Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0 > > The sections 5.5 and 5.6 in the basic profile > (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/Basic/2003-08/BasicProfile-1.0a. > htm) are devoted to binding aspects but, several major > sections including section 4, other sections of 5 address > abstract aspects of WSDL, which is a pretty large portion. > All those are applicable BPEL IMO. > > Prasad > > Satish Thatte wrote: > Most of the BP 1.0 directives are binding related. BP also > forbids outbound operations which BPEL does not use. Can > someone identify a directive in BP 1.0 that actually affects BPEL? > > Satish > > 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]