Geir, I absolutely agree with your point that this would be a stronger community and a better software stack if we could bring all together into one project. And that was exactly the point of my initial proposal. I was just expressing the fact that a web-service (WSDL and XML messaging) based engine may have different constraints than more "traditional" state-based workflow engines as it must be rather tightly coupled with the WS layer (I think that was Sanjivas's point). But here I'm talking about communication (interface) constraints, not purely execution constraints (nowadays very few specifications don't rely on WSDL anyway).
Now in terms of execution, no standard cover all workflow patterns as defined by Pr. Wil van der Aalst. However a robust implementation should support most of them. Many "pure web service" oriented specifications do not consider workitems either, even it's often very useful for end users. I think that's the sort of things you have in mind Geir. Am I wrong ? An implementation that wouldn't accept extension would of course be a very bad one. Supporting BPEL was just a first goal when we implemented Twister (we actually implemented a worklist) but any robust product should be able to evoluate to accept other specifications for both orchestration and choreography as well as others "nice to have" features not directly covered by WS-* specifications. Speaking about WS-CDL, this specification covers choreography which is different from orchestration (sometimes opposed as private and public processes). BPEL tried to address both calling them executable process and abstract process. But as the specification is strongly oriented on executable (as in bpEl) it somewhat failed to properly address abstract ones. I think the Oasis TC is even talking about dropping that part (Sanjiva?). So WS-CDL now covers this ground and does it quite well. So in short (finally), I believe it's possible to have an implementation that would be definitely web services oriented AND that would support most BPM use cases. The first relates to communication, the second to execution model which are two different things. On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:59:48 -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2004, at 10:41 PM, Uijin Hong (íìì) wrote: > > > > > > > I hope to see Agila(or Apache-BPM-engine) > > could run both BPEL and WS-CDL. > > +1! > > -- > > > Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
