Subject: AW: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested
Your comments reflect two concerns:
(1) Proper presentation of multi-party B2B interactions
(2) Proper presentation of multiple bindings
Please see my email sent as a response to Steve Capell. I tried to explain why multi-party B2B interactions are not addressed by the technical note.
Section 2 of your paper discusses an example and we have some doubts how WSDL port types are tailored. Two activities, paying with credit card or paying by direct debiting, are semantically different and will probably require different implementations. Whether those two services can be described using a single WSDL definition and differentiated using different bindings is questionable. Each activity requires different data, and the question is whether the semantics can be detected at the binding level. We assume that all bindings of the same port type have the same semantics and which binding is used is determined during the negotiation phase. So, it might be useful to discuss other examples in order to understand the value of the proposed extension.
Von: Axel Martens [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2004 22:23
An: Luc Clement
Cc: Diane Jordan; 'James Bryce Clark'; email@example.com; 'Mary McRae'; 'Tony Rogers'; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Betreff: RE: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested
we had an internal reviewing process within IBM, and a
consolidated comment should have been sent to the UDDI TC.
Somehow, the transmission did not happen. Hence, I send you the
comments of my group on the proposed technical note, attached to
this email. As the core idea, we consider the explicit
representation of the partner link concept necessary. The document
proposes the introduction of a partner link tModel, the adjustment
of the queries and relations, and two additional queries. The
document describes our reasons and design decisions illustrated by
a small example.
Best regards, Axel.
Post Doc Researcher
Component Systems Group
IBM TJ Watson Research Center
Hawthorne, NY (USA)
Phone: (914) 784-7480
"Luc Clement" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
11/26/2004 08:46 AM
To Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, <email@example.com> cc <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, "'James Bryce Clark'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "'Mary McRae'" <email@example.com>, "'Tony Rogers'" <Tony.Rogers@ca.com> Subject RE: [wsbpel] "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI registry" OASIS UDDI Spec TC Technical Note - Review Requested
Having provided sufficient time to review the "Using BPEL4WS in a UDDI Registry" Technical Note it is the UDDI Spec TC’s opinion this Technical Note is ready to be published. It is our intent to publish this TN by the end of this calendar year. That said, should you have additional feedback please provide it no later than 3 Dec so it may be considered prior to the expected ratification of the TN by this TC in mid-Dec.
We understand that there may be unresolved issues relating to the relevance of abstract processes as it relates to the WSBPEL specification. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that the TN applies to the BPEL4WS 1.1 specification submitted to the WSBPEL TC and which defines the concept of abstract processes. The decision to map BPEL4WS 1.1 was deliberate – the TN aims at addressing current market needs.
Senior Program Manager, Systinet
Co-Chair OASIS UDDI Spec TC
Tel: +1.617.768.4268 / Cell: +1.978.793.2162 / www.systinet.com
From: Luc Clement [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 20:59
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; Karl F. Best; James Bryce Clark; Mary McRae; Tony Rogers
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"  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:
We would appreciate comments as soon as possible but preferably before 31 Aug 04. Please submit comments:
- 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
To: Claus von Riegen, SAP (email@example.com),
cc: (UDDI Chairs): firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Thanks in advance
Co-Chair OASIS UDDI Spec TC
 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