[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] usage of <partner> in BPEL?
Hi Alex, I don't see partners as a deployment detail, even though they (like everything else in a BPEL process) would need to be resolved at deployment time. If anything, partner belongs to a higher level of abstraction than partner links, since the intent was to capture business relationships between partner links which are not reflected on how port types (nor bindings) are factored. It certainly doesn't belong at the lower layer of WSDL bindings. However, I think that it is a legitimate question whether partner adds sufficient value to BPEL, particularly since there is no single way we can point at for using that information. My own opinion would be to keep it because it allows embedding relevant business constraints into the process definition. Paco Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle. To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org com> cc: Alex Yiu <alex.yiu@oracle.com> Subject: [wsbpel] usage of <partner> in BPEL? 06/28/2004 08:19 PM Hi all, We define <partnerLink> and <partner> in BPEL. The usage of <partnerLink> is very clear in BPEL. (e.g. invoke relies on partnerLink). However, the usage of <partner> is not clear. Is it more like a deployment related information? Should it be a part of WSDL binding? There are not other BPEL construct make uses of <partner> declaration. I have done a very informal poll to a number of vendors last week at BPEL F2F in SF. It seems to me that no particular vendor is actively making use of <partner> Any further thoughts? Thanks! Regards, Alex Yiu 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/leave_workgroup.php .
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]