paco -
i just skimmed it, and my impression hasn't changed. as a
case in point, here are the first two sentences of the
abstract:
"BPEL4WS abstract processes describe the observable behavior of
Web services. They
complement abstract WSDL interfaces (port types and operations)
and the UDDI model
by defining dependencies between service operations in the
context of a message
exchange."
this sentiment, especially of the first sentence, is echoed many
times throughout the Note. most of the time without the 2nd half of the
second sentence to slightly temper the connotation.
someone who isn't reading this with the background of the large
conversation that is going on in our TC could easily be led to believe in the
existence of the correspondence between Abstract WSDL and Abstract BPEL
that I mentioned before.
while i don't completely think that this paper is off base, i
would prefer to be informed by the work of the abstract BPEL subcommittee before
rendering final judgement (my point 1 below). as for point 2, i can't help
but think that unless the wording of this paper is changed to be extremely
cautious around the definition and explanation of Abstract BPEL, it will only
lead to further confusion.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 1:35
PM
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a
UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested
Danny,
You should read the proposal. I
think it makes a lot of sense, even if I would have my own set of comments
and suggestions to make. Many of us assume that abstract BPEL will likely
become the premier mechanism to encode behavior (protocol) information in a
service description. I don't think many people would argue with this
notion.
Also, this is the first time I have heard of anyone
misinterpreting "abstract" as in "abstract BPEL" to mean "WSDL
abstract" as in
"port type".
Paco
Danny van
der
Rijn
To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
<dannyv@tibco.com
cc:
>
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec
TC Technical
Note - Review
Requested
08/04/2004
03:52
PM
as i said in conference today, i am afraid that the UDDI
TC is even more confused about what Abstract BPEL is than we are.
other than pointing out even more strongly the importance of getting our
definition of Abstract BPEL pinned down, i think that this note should lead
us in 2 directions:
1) finding out why someone would want to register
an Abstract BPEL with UDDI. 2) changing the name of Abstract BPEL.
this is not the first time i've seen someone confuse the relationship
between Abstract BPEL and Executable BPEL to conflate it with the
relationship between Abstract WSDL and Concrete WSDL, and unless we change
the name, i'm sure it won't be the last.
i admit, i haven't read the
UDDI proposal referenced in this note, but i feel pretty safe in my
assumption without having read it.
danny ----- Original Message
----- From: Luc Clement To: drj@us.ibm.com ; jevdemon@microsoft.com Cc: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
; Karl F. Best ; James Bryce Clark ; Mary McRae ; Tony Rogers Sent:
Tuesday, August 03, 2004 5:58 PM Subject: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI
registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested
Dear
WSBPEL Chairs, The UDDI Spec TC has been working on a “Using BPEL4WS in a
UDDI registry” Technical Note (TN) that it would like your input on before
proceeding to ratify this TN. The TN provides a mapping for publishing
BPEL4WS abstract processes into a UDDI registry. The primary goals of
mapping BPEL4WS artifacts to the UDDI model are to: 1.
Enable the automatic registration of BPEL4WS definitions in
UDDI 2. Enable optimized and flexible UDDI queries based on
specific BPEL4WS artifacts and
metadata 3. Provide composability with the mapping described
in the "Using WSDL in a UDDI Registry,
Version 2.0.2" [1] Technical Note. We would like to invite the BPEL TC to
review and comment on the document and ask that you assign two or more
reviewers. The TN is posted at the following locations by
format:
PDF: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/download.php/8442/uddi-spec-tc-tn-bpel-20040725.pdf
MSWord: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/download.php/8441/uddi-spec-tc-tn-bpel-20040725.doc
We
would appreciate comments as soon as possible but preferably before 31 Aug
04. Please submit comments: To: Claus von
Riegen, SAP (claus.von.riegen@sap.com),
cc: (UDDI Chairs): luc.clement@systinet.com; tony.rogers@ca.com
cc: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org Thanks
in advance
Luc Clément Co-Chair OASIS UDDI Spec TC Systinet
Corporation Tel: +1.617.395.6798
[1] OASIS UDDI Spec TC
Technical Note: “Using WSDL in a UDDI Registry, Version 2.0.2”, http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tns.htm#WSDLTNV2
|