btw, the templating that was in the paper didn't really match the
templating that i'm describing which is why i called it out.
Danny van der Rijn wrote:
> i was hoping that i misunderstood the intent. i bothered to be so
> detailed so someone could point out the error in my misunderstanding.
>
> as far as a list of features, no i don't have one. they are just
> omitting what they please and providing what they find to be usefully
> portable. but a concrete example of that that i do know is that they
> are leaving out specifics of the WSDLs. "you receive an order here,
> and you send a confirmation response." that's all that you need to
> know at that point. not what a line item looks like. not even what
> an order looks like.
>
> Satish Thatte wrote:
>
>> Danny,
>>
>> I think your description of the challenge response metaphor for
>> proving conformance represents a misunderstanding of the intent
>> (brute force search among lots of randomly generated possibilities
>> was not the idea). Moreover, the templating case is explicitly
>> supported in Rania's paper I believe. Rania and I will address that
>> separately.
>>
>> But I am very curious about the specific details your customers would
>> want to omit while still preserving the meaningfulness of the
>> "process IP" they would be selling. Do you have a list of features
>> that ought to be allowed for omission?
>>
>> Satish
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Danny van der Rijn [mailto:]
>> Sent: Thu 9/23/2004 8:57 PM
>> To: ; ;
>>
>> Subject: [Fwd: Re: [wsbpel] abstract process strawman]
>>
>>
>> you don't see that every day. i remembered the attachment, but
>> forgot the inline text.
>>
>> the enclosed document is my quick reaction to the abstract
>> presentation from yesterday.
>>
>> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [wsbpel] abstract
>> process strawman
>> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 20:52:21 -0700
>> From: Danny van der Rijn <>
>> <mailto:>
>> To:
>> CC: ,
>>
>> References: <>
>> <">mailto:>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> rkhalaf wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> As promised, here is the abstract process strawman document I
>> have been putting together. This work aspired to define a consistent
>> view of abstract processes and their use as the basis for continuted
>> discussion and concrete proposals/resolutions.
>> According to the Agenda, tomorrow or Thursday will be when the
>> abstract proc stuff will be discussed.
>> Regards, Rania
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
>> roster of the OASIS TC), go to
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
>> of the OASIS TC), go to
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
