RE: Choreography and REST

"Edwin Khodabakchian" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Organization Collaxa Inc.
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Christopher,

It seems to me that there are 2 distinct problems:
Problem#1: Describe the protocol of messages exchanged between 2
parties. Usually called Choreography. This is simply a interface
definition that needs to be language neutral and can be easily expressed
using XML. (WSCI is trying to address this problem).

Problem#2: Implement the workflows that are compliant with those
collaboration protocols. This is executable logic that "scripts" a set
of components into a long-lived transaction. Those language have built
in support for asynchrony, flow control, long-lived transactions etc..
And in this case, it is true that XML is a loosy and unintuitive
representation for writing executable code.

Both problems benefit from a visual representation that enables between
communication, training, etc...

Based on my understanding, the pattern suggested by Paul is trying to
address #1. It is also known as the "shared repository pattern".

It will be interesting to see how BPEL4WS tries to address those 2
problems.

Cheers,

Edwin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher B Ferris
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 10:16 AM
> To: bhaugen
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Choreography and REST
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob,
> 
> I don't disagree. However, the pre/post condition semantics need to
> (somehow)
> be expressed. REST itself doesn't address this. Where would 
> we find the declarative pre/post conditions expressed not 
> only for a resource, but for a class of resources? for 
> classes of related resources?
> 
> What this ends up looking like is a distributed Makefile and 
> how many people (especially business types!) can read, 
> understand and internalize a Makefile? In my expefrience, very few.
> 
> Personally, I like declarative languages, I think it is a 
> superior approach. But, most people have a *really* hard time 
> with them. XSLT is a good example. Most people I know throw 
> their hands up in despair when faced with having to write, or 
> worse debug, an XSLT stylesheet:)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Christopher Ferris
> Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> email: [email protected]
> phone: +1 508 234 3624
> 
> 
>                                                               
>                                                                     
>                       bhaugen                                 
>                                                                     
>                       <linkage@interacc        To:       
> [email protected]                                            
>            
>                       ess.com>                 cc:            
>                                                                     
>                       Sent by:                 Subject:  Re: 
> Choreography and REST                                                
>                       www-ws-arch-reque                       
>                                                                     
>                       [email protected]                               
>                                                                     
>                                                               
>                                                                     
>                                                               
>                                                                     
>                       08/09/2002 12:32                        
>                                                                     
>                       PM                                      
>                                                                     
>                                                               
>                                                                     
>                                                               
>                                                                     
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christopher Ferris wrote:
> 
> >Paul's analysis doesn't take into account the fact that
> > there are real business issues to be considered w/r/t
> > the order of things that need to be understood
> > *and agreed upon*, a priori to beginning an exchange
> > of messages.
> 
> Chris,
> 
> I agree with every word of your paragraph,
> but Paul's articles have caused me to
> rethink how I might satisfy the business
> requirements.
> 
> As you know, I'm coming from the ebXML
> Business Process group where we put
> a lot of emphasis on choreography.
> 
> But since then, as we got deeper into the problem
> (in UN/CEFACT eBTWG), it became more clear
> that choreography decisions are business decisions
> (or decisions of whatever is the domain of discourse)
> and not just programming logic e.g. forks and joins
> and state transitions.
> 
> So we started to use business object states
> (from a semantic business model) as the basis
> for choreography expressed as pre and post
> conditions for document exchanges.
> 
> Now I'm opening my mind up to the direction
> Paul Prescod is proposing and thinking that
> it fits a lot with where we went in eBTWG, if you
> think of the business objects as REST
> resources.
> 
> Another way to think of it is as speech acts
> in a structured conversation.  One speech
> act, a commitment, promises a delivery
> of goods or services; a reciprocal speech
> act promises payment.  Subsequent
> speech acts notify of the delivery and
> payment events.
> 
> Each speech act becomes a REST
> resource, which can then be used
> as a posting address or condition for
> subsequent speech acts.
> 
> There can be published rules (other
> REST resources), and there is a kind
> of choreography embedded in the
> speech acts.  But it's very different
> from the procedural workflow style
> of choreography.
> 
> Think about it.  I don't have it all worked
> out in my mind yet, and don't know if
> Paul has either, but don't dismiss it
> out of hand.
> 
> (P.S. I don't know if my speech-act
> scenario is anything near what Paul
> has in mind.)
> 
> -Bob Haugen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.