Couple of relevant papers FWIW

"Damodaran, Suresh" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <23AB6ECCD0FD064BAD472FA37FF80A781F4AFA@scidalmsg01.csg.stercomm.com>

An analysis of BPEL (might help to position it with BPSS)
http://www.ebpml.org/bpel4ws.htm

Comparison of BPML & BPEL

http://www.ebpml.org/A_Comparison_of_XPDL_and_BPML_BPEL.doc


Cheers,

-Suresh
Sterling Commerce (on loan to RosettaNet)



-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Prescod [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:55 PM
To: Ugo Corda
Cc: 'Champion, Mike'; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Article on WS architecture and best practice ... may be of
in terest



Ugo Corda wrote:
>>this methodology
>>defeats the whole purpose of Web services, which is to hide the
>>implementation of a service completely behind an XML-based interface. 
>>VS.NET generates the interface from the implementation.
> 
> 
> I don't see the conflict here. For any user of the Web service the
generated
> interface does exactly that: hides the original implementation.
> 
> If the point made by the article is that Web services interfaces should be
> defined first and implementations should follow, this is evidently not
> possible in all those cases where Web services are used as wrappers for
> legacy implementations.

I think that the point is that the web service's interfaces should be 
designed to make it into a good network application which could be 
radically different than the appropriate interfaces for a LAN-based or 
desktop software component for all of the reasons described in the 
"Waldo paper" and elsewhere. If you are just letting software "generate" 
your network interface from a pre-existing interface then the chances it 
is optimal as a network application is tiny.

  Paul
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.