Re: [Fwd: Re: [wsbpel] abstract process strawman]

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

>> Khalaf: The def is not supposed to yield an algorithm directly, but 
>> to clearly and intuitively explain what this compliance def is 
>> checking for. The algorithm one may use to check "observable 
>> compliance" should not a brute force one from the def, and that's 
>> quite obvious to tell (you could have infinitely many 
>> minimum-no-fault-...-completions). Also, the definition is still 
>> being clarified.
>
mm1: Please, use the word 'conformance.' Compliance is most often a 
regulatory, mandatory requirement that has legal implications on 
software performance. I believe in the context of this discussion 
conformance, not compliance applies. They are very different things. 
Thank you.