RE: Terminology Question

Christopher B Ferris <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <OF09B1802A.456D9133-ON85256CD7.0041A11D-85256CD7.00476A77@us.ibm.com>
+1, an MEP is not supposed to extend to the likes of a conversation. I 
think that we 
should limit as Amy/Arkin suggest, to capture the basic communication 
idiom.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: [email protected]
phone: +1 508 234 3624

[email protected] wrote on 02/23/2003 07:13:59 PM:

> David,
> 
> I was about to raise an issue regarding the use of MEP in the WSA 
document.
> 
> A message exchange pattern can be as simple as a WSDL operation, but in 
fact can also be as 
> complex as a long-lasting multi-party choreography. Unless we restrict 
the definition of MEP, I 
> would say that Wsb services choreography also addresses MEPs and MEP is 
just another way to define
> a conversation. And in fact several people have proposed extending MEPs 
to the point where they 
> tread into the space of choreography.
> 
> I suggest that we formally define WSDL as capturing a specific type of 
MEP which, as Amy said 
> before, attempts to capture the basic communication idioms (synch, 
asynch, unicast and multicast) 
> with the restriction that each WSDL MEP contains the minimal number of 
messages required for such 
> an idiom. A choreography language would then provide more complex MEPs 
using these communication idioms.
> 
> arkin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On 
Behalf Of Burdett, David
> Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 3:56 PM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Terminology Question

> For what it's worth here's are my ideas based on what other groups such 
as ebXML and WS 
> Choreography tend to use (I am off-line and so can't quote) Really there 
are two levels:
> 1. Message Exchange Patterns are a short exchange of messages such as 
one-way or request-response,
> together with associated acknowledgement/receipt messages.
> 2. A Conversation consists of a combination of Message Exchange Patterns 
where all the messages 
> are related in some way.
> The word "Conversation" is used because the exchange of information can 
consist of an 
> indeterminate number of exchanges of information as in a real 
conversation between people. A 
> classic example of a conversation is the sequence of messages exchanged 
to place and/or change an order:
> BUYER                     SELLER 
>        Order --------> 
>              <-------- Order Response 
> Change Order --------> 
>              <-------- Change Order Response 
> ... repeat change order as required ... 
> Cancel Order --------> (only if required) 
>              <-------- Cancel Order Response 
> Thoughts? 
> David 
> 

> -----Original Message----- 
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 1:59 PM 
> To: [email protected] 
> Subject: RE: Terminology Question 
> 

> So the collection of messages that manifest the exchange would be 
> called... 
> Jim Murphy 
> Mindreef, Inc. 
> http://www.mindreef.com 
> 

> > -----Original Message----- 
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On 
> > Behalf Of Francis McCabe 
> > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 4:34 PM 
> > To: [email protected] 
> > Cc: [email protected] 
> > Subject: Re: Terminology Question 
> > 
> > 
> > This is a message exchange pattern 
> > 
> > On Friday, February 21, 2003, at 01:30  PM, <[email protected]> 
> > wrote: 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Speaking of definitions, what term are folks using to describe the 
> > > collection of messages that occur when an operation is invoked.  For 

> > > the 
> > > typical input/output operations you would have 2, a request and a 
> > > response. In a one-way you would have 1, in a solicit response you 
> > > would 
> > > have n etc. 
> > > 
> > > What moniker would y'all recommend for this collection: 
> > > 
> > > 1.  Exchange 
> > > 2.  Conversation 
> > > 3. ??? 
> > > 
> > > Something that indicates the fact that these messages are part of 
> the 
> > > same operation is the critical part for me. 
> > > 
> > > Thanks. 
> > > 
> > > Jim Murphy 
> > > Mindreef, Inc. 
> > > http://www.mindreef.com 
> > > 
> > >
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.