Bob,
I'd agree that "choreography" refers to the intended arrangement of a (type
of) interaction, and not to any corrective rearrangement that may occur
during execution of a particular interaction.
Tony Weida
Edifecs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Haugen [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2000 4:05 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: '[email protected]'
> Subject: RE: Collaboration Services (was: Business Service Interface)
>
>
> <Krishna Sankar>
> Yep. Sequencing is a little strict and does not bring out
> the concept very
> well. I am using the term "ordering" (which means temporal
> ordering) as the
> term for this when talking with the business. Also there is the explicit
> ordering (means there is some information in the XML document to reflect
> ordering) and implicit (there is no ordering specific information
> in the XML
> document) ordering. Sequence Numbers and timeStamp are two methods to
> achieve explicit ordering.
> </Krishna Sankar>
>
> The ordering or choreography relationships that are most interesting
> to me are those that have clear business logic behind them,
> often in the form of pre and post conditions.
> For example, a prepayment business collaboration contract
> would mean the payment must arrive before the delivery.
> Economic events that fulfill commitments would be expected
> to occur after their respective commitments.
> Or another way, the states of a negotiation could be
> choreographed by a state machine.
>
> One question on terminology: "choreography" implies (to me)
> the deliberate ordering of events. "Ordering" might also mean
> a corrected sequence when the received messages arrive
> out of their causal order. (Or would you use the same
> term in either case, Tony Weida?)
>
> Thanks for the conversation,
> Bob Haugen
>
