OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue - 77 - Under specified operation definitions


This subject has been recently discussed in a (long) WSDL WG thread. See the thread "PROPOSAL: Drop interface/operation/(input|output)/@headers" at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Oct/thread.html). 


P.S. Please do not confuse these discussions with the resolution of issue 77. I raised that issue in the very specific and limited context exemplified by the WSDL code at http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html#Issue77 . The intent of that issue is to resolve a specific case of legacy applications currently not supported by BPEL, and has to do with using abstract messages defined outside an abstract operation (and we have no idea of what those legacy applications used those abstract messages for). In particular, the intent of issue 77 is not to resolve the controversial problem of application-level headers vs. QoS-related headers. As you can see from the WSDL thread I mentioned above, different people have different opinions on that subject, and the debate might very well continue until 2005. If somebody wants to discuss these additional issues within the BPEL TC, please open a new issue.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Ten-Hove [mailto:Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 8:04 AM
> To: Francisco Curbera
> Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 77 - Under specified operation 
> definitions
> Paco,
>     You put this very well (and lot more clearly than when I 
> mentioned 
> "secondary protocols" without elaborating on what that meant!).
>     I think a lot of this debate has to do with what people 
> expect to do 
> with those SOAP headers. Some hold that they are suitable only for 
> lower-level layers of protocol stacks, and certainly are not 
> of concern 
> at the business process level (as you say, it is relegated to the 
> middleware). Others see a need to use SOAP headers for 
> application-level 
> purposes, or some business-level "awareness" of lower-level protocols 
> (e.g., identity of  the signer of a document).
>     I'll forgo comment on the dangers of all this 
> SOAP-centric thinking; 
> Satish has done a good job of articulating the WSDL-centric viewpoint 
> (about which he and I are in agreement, I believe). However, 
> we may need 
> to discuss the above viewpoints (middleware vs. application use of  
> "secondary protocols"). Can we (the TC, that is) agree that 
> there is a 
> clear separation between WSDL-described business messages, and 
> lower-level protocols used primarily for QoS purposes?
>     And where, in this careful separation of concerns, does 
> WS-Addressing fit in? It seems to be peeking through to the business 
> level, and thus requires support in the BPEL language. Are 
> there other 
> candidates that fit this pattern?
> Best regards,
> -Ron
> Francisco Curbera wrote:
> >
> >
> >Hi Ugo,
> >
> >It is interesting that you mention WSIF because WSIF follows 
> very strictly
> >the notion that one programs against the explicit porttype 
> definition only,
> >and relegates all protocol specific stuff down to the 
> middleware - where it
> >belongs. When we developed WSIF two years ago the whole idea 
> was to have a
> >Web services programming model counterpart of the WSDL 
> separation between
> >business interface (the porttype) and protocol and QoS 
> specific function
> >and artifacts. BPEL embodies today that same approach of 
> trying to keep
> >binding stuff from obfuscating the business logic while at 
> the same time
> >allowing you to run over multiple protocols (a fact which we 
> conveniently
> >exploited building the BPWS4J engine on top of WSIF.)
> >
> >In any case, I have to agree with you that WSIF lets you do 
> really cool
> >stuff ;-)
> >
> >Paco
> >
> >   .
> >
> 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

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]