Let me clarify point
4 (sorry, I mislabeled it as 3) in relation to point 1.
I think we should
distinguish services that are not compliant with BP 1.0 from those that are
simply out of scope for BP 1.0.
If I have a Web
service that is not bound to SOAP/HTTP, then I would say it is out of scope for
BP 1.0, so it's OK for BPEL to interact with it.
My point 4 is about
services that are within the scope of BP 1.0 and still do not comply with its
requirements.
Ugo
-----Original Message-----
From: Satish Thatte
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003
11:09 AM
To: Ugo Corda; Prasad Yendluri
Cc: BPEL
OASIS
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP
1.0
I doubt that we can
mandate BPEL to be used with BP 1.0 compliant services only especially given
the answer to 1 assuming it is correct, and given that there are many services
today that are not compliant (e.g., RPC encoded
ones).
From: Ugo Corda
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003
10:55 AM
To: Satish
Thatte; Prasad Yendluri
Cc: BPEL OASIS
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I
BP 1.0
I see a few
separate issues/questions connected to the relationship of BP 1.0 and
BPEL.
1- Would
BP 1.0 be restricting BPEL to the point that some of BPEL's functionality
would not be available?
I cannot think
of any such restriction off the top of my head.
2- Would the
fact that BP 1.0 only addresses the SOAP/HTTP binding imply that also BPEL
should be limited to that type of binding?
I don't think
that anybody would imply that.
3- Should a
BPEL process be offered as a Web service that is BP 1.0
compliant?
My answer would
be yes.
3- Would it be
fair to limit BPEL use to interacting with BP 1.0 compliant Web services
only?
My personal
answer would be yes. But I am a member of WS-I, and I understand other people
might have different answers.
Ugo
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Satish Thatte
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003
10:39 AM
To: Prasad Yendluri
Cc: BPEL OASIS
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I
BP 1.0
For the benefit of
the non-expert could post a salient example please? Specifically, a
BPEL usage pattern that would not work if BP 1.0 is followed but would work
if any WSDL 1.1 portType is allowed. In other words, is BP 1.0 a
restriction on the WSDL artifacts we use or potentially on BPEL
itself?
From: Prasad
Yendluri [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003
10:11 AM
To: Satish
Thatte
Cc:
BPEL OASIS
Subject: Re:
[wsbpel] Issue 47 and WS-I BP 1.0
The sections 5.5 and 5.6 in
the basic profile (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/Basic/2003-08/BasicProfile-1.0a.htm)
are devoted to binding aspects but, several major sections including section
4, other sections of 5 address abstract aspects of WSDL, which is a pretty
large portion. All those are applicable BPEL
IMO.
Prasad
Satish
Thatte wrote:
Most of the BP 1.0 directives
are binding related. BP also forbids outbound operations which BPEL
does not use. Can someone identify a directive in BP 1.0 that actually
affects BPEL?
Satish
