This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
The WS-CDL specification (Web Services Choreography Description Language version 1.0 W3C Last Call Draft 17 December 2004 http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ws-cdl-10-20041217/) should state the relationship between WS-CDL and the OASIS ebXML Business Process Specification Schema (ebBP) work in OASIS. Although WS-CDL and ebBP address similar problem domains, the divergent foci of the two enables them to be layerable - while WS-CDL focuses primarily on the web service perspective, ebBP describes the pure business message flow and state alignment. As such they are not mutually exclusive. Toward this, ebBP v2.0 (which is nearing a vote for OASIS Committee Draft) supports mapping of Business Transaction patterns to abstract operations through the OperationMapping constructs, definition of business QoS guidelines, and it can be supported by CPPA, which maps to concrete WSDL. These mechanisms provide the avenue for WS-CDL and ebBP compatibility. Given this, the WS-CDL specification should include similar language to that expressed in Section 1.3 (Specification Composability) and 1.5 (Relationship to Business Process Languages). It is recommended that language be added to indicate WS-CDL and ebBP are not mutually exclusive, and that, through mechanisms such as those mentioned above, compatibility exists between the two. This is consistent with the current text that references BPML, BPEL, etc. Note that, at present, Section 1.5 only addresses CDL's relationship with executable languages. If including the language for stating the relationship with ebBP is not consistent for Section 1.5, it is recommended that a subsequent section be added to address ebBP (and like specifications). It is proposed that we add the following to 1.3: "Specification Composability. This specification will work alongside and complement other specifications such as the WS-Reliability [WSRM], WS-Composite Application Framework (WS-CAF) [WSCAF], WS-Security [WSS], Business Process Execution Language for WS (WS-BPEL) [WSBPEL], ebXML Business Process Specification Schema [ebBP], etc." It is proposed that we add the following either to 1.5 or in a subsequent new section: "Relationship with the ebXML Business Process framework The ebXML Business Process Specification Schema technical specification defines a standard language by which business systems may be configured to support execution of business collaborations. Such business collaborations consist of business transactions, which are implemented through semantics defined in one of several standard, extensible or trading partner-specific business transaction patterns. These patterns specify the business message exchange (requests, responses and business signals) applicable to a given business transaction definition. Through ebBP mapping of Business Transaction patterns to abstract operations, and when preferred, combined with CPPA support of concrete WSDL, WS-CDL and ebBP can be used in a complementary manner."
agreed at concall 05-feb-05: needs dsicussion plus relationship to un/cefect bpss
Here is revised text to propose for Section 1.5 or subsequent new section: "Relationship with the ebXML Business Process framework The ebXML Business Process Specification Schema technical specification, the product of ongoing work contributed by OASIS and CEFAC, defines a standardized language by which business systems may be configured to support execution of business collaborations. Such business collaborations consist of business transactions, which are implemented through semantics defined in one of several standard, extensible or trading partner-specific business transaction patterns. These patterns specify the business message exchange (requests, responses and business signals) applicable to a given business transaction definition. Through ebBP mapping of Business Transaction patterns to abstract operations (available beginning with ebBP 2.0), and when preferred, combined with CPPA support of concrete WSDL, WS-CDL and ebBP can be used in a complementary manner."
ebBP 2.0 provides a mapping between business transaction activities (i.e. the usage of a business transaction definition in a business collaboration definition) and operations of one or more web services. Through this support of WSDL operations, specified as part of CPP/CPA, ebBP intends to support business collaborations where one or more business partners do not support ebXML interchanges. Through this support, CDL can be used in an ebBP environment, as long as the operations are supported via WSDL. Thus, if one wishes to use CDL in an ebBP environment, ebBP 2.0 can focus on the message exchange aspects while use CDL to support chor on the basis of endpoint references as is done in WSDL.
We can see how CDL can be used with ebBP. A detailed example may be useful to illustrate this, but it seems fairly apparent how the two can be used together. We do have to answer the question of why we want to use CDL in conjunction with ebBP, rather than the entire ebBP stack to provide choreography on down, simply using WSDL endpoints.
Proposal from Charlton Barreto URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005May/0006.html Update section 1.3 "Goals" to read as follows (changes in bold): * Specification Composability. This specification will work alongside and/or complement other specifications such as the WS-Reliability [WSRM], WS-Composite Application Framework (WS-CAF) [WSCAF], WS-Security [WSS], Business Process Execution Language for WS (WS-BPEL) [WSBPEL], ebXML Business Process Specification Schema [ebBP], etc. Update section 1.5 "Relationship with Business Process Languages" to read as follows (changes in bold): A Choreography Description Language is not an "executable business process description language" or an implementation language. The role of specifying the execution logic of an application will be covered by these [XLANG], [WSFL], [WSBPEL], [BPML], [XPDL], [JLS], [C#S] and other specifications. A Choreography Description Language does not depend on a specific business process implementation language. Thus, it can be used to specify truly interoperable, collaborations between any type of party regardless of the supporting platform or programming model used by the implementation of the hosting environment. A Choreography Description Language may be couple with other computable semantic definitions, such as those specified in the OASIS ebBP. Each party, adhering to a Choreography Description Language collaboration representation, could be implemented using completely different mechanisms such as: * Applications, whose implementation is based on executable business process languages [XLANG], [WSFL], [WSBPEL], [BPML], [XPDL] * Applications, whose implementation is based on general purpose programming languages [JLS], [C#S] * Or human controlled software agents Please provide any feedback you may have on this. Cheers, -Charlton.
resolution agreed at meeting om 10th may: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/chor/5/05/10-minutes.html *** SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL to resolve issue 1092 *** ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws- chor/2005May/0006.html PROPOSED AMENDMENT (1): "This specification will work" to "This specification is intended to work". PROPOSED AMENDMENT (2): Add "CEFACT BPSS" to Section 1.3. PROPOSED AMENDMENT (3): REPLACE "A Choreography Description Language may be couple with other computable semantic definitions, such as those specified in the OASIS ebBP." WITH "A choreography description language may couple with other languages such those that add further computable semantic definitions." marked as editorial
As per agreement 10 May 05 changed in section 1.3:Specification Composability. This specification will work alongside and complement other specifications such as the WS-Reliability [21], WS-Composite Application Framework (WS-CAF) [20], WS-Security [23], Business Process Execution Language for WS (WS-BPEL) [17], etc.to:Specification Composability. This specification is intended to work alongside and/or complement other specifications such as the WS-Reliability [21], WS-Composite Application Framework (WS-CAF) [20], WS-Security [23], Business Process Execution Language for WS (WS-BPEL) [17], ebXML Business Process Specification Schema [30, 31], etc.and in section 1.5 changedThe Choreography Description Language is not an "executable business process description language" or an implementation language. The role of specifying the execution logic of an application will be covered by these [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [22], [25] and other specifications.A Choreography Description Language does not depend on a specific business process implementation language. Thus, it can be used to specify truly interoperable, collaborations between any type of party regardless of the supporting platform or programming model used by the implementation of the hosting environment. Each party, adhering to a Choreography Description Language collaboration representation, could be implemented using completely different mechanisms such as:Applications, whose implementation is based on executable business process languages [15], [16], [17], [18], [19] Applications, whose implementation is based on general purpose programming languages [22], [25] Or human controlled software agentsto:A Choreography Description Language is not an "executable business process description language" or an implementation language. The role of specifying the execution logic of an application will be covered by these [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [22], [25] and other specifications.A Choreography Description Language does not depend on a specific business process implementation language. Thus, it can be used to specify truly interoperable, collaborations between any type of party regardless of the supporting platform or programming model used by the implementation of the hosting environment. A Choreography Description Language may couple with other languages such those that add further computable semantic definitions.Each party, adhering to a Choreography Description Language collaboration representation, could be implemented using completely different mechanisms such as: * Applications, whose implementation is based on executable business process languages [15], [16], [17], [18], [19] * Applications, whose implementation is based on general purpose programming languages [22], [25] * Or human controlled software agentsand added references 30 and 31 (in short form needs expanding to precise references)
group notification of status change: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member- ws-chor/2005Jul/0004.html
no comments from group so closed confirmed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jul/0004.html