[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TCTechnical Note - Review Requested
I don't think Bernd's use case assumes a multiparty scenario. The TN seems to cover reasonably well the 2 party case; it also seems reasonable to start with that simple case (since almost everyone understands it) but eventually we'll want to figure out whether or when a multiparty BPEL would need to be registered in UDDI. 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 08/05/2004 04:19 PM i agree with the sentiment of your note, bernd. however, according to my reading of the TN, that (multi-party) usage isn't covered. what the travel agency can register is the abstract BPEL that describes THEIR OWN behavior, and not a "you implement this" abstract BPEL. danny ----- Original Message ----- From: Eckenfels. Bernd To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested Hello Danny, for a service provider (i.e. TravelAgency) it makes sense to publish an abstract BPEL PRocess which describes as a template how a Process of a TravelAgent has to look like. AbstractBPEL cannot describe the observal overall process, but it can describe in an abstract way the exepcted sequence of invocations (and therefore also the offered ports). I think the UDDI TN is nearly compelte in that respect, only the wording "observal state" needs to be changed. Also I wonder if the Process Local Name needs to have its own attribut in the tModel/Bag, but I am not very familiar with UDDI. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Bernd Eckenfels Chief Architect -- SEEBURGER AG - Edisonstr.1 , D-75015 Bretten, Germany Fax: +49 (0)7252 96-2400 - Phone: +49 (0)7252 96-1256 mailto:b.eckenfels@seeburger.de - http://www.seeburger.de -----Original Message----- From: Danny van der Rijn [mailto:dannyv@tibco.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 9:52 PM To: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested 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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]