OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-bp message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: Service and Action

you are right we should plan to meet to iron this out.
Just a quick comment though. In BPSS Business Transactions are stand alone
re-usable protocols. As such they are directly under the root element for
anyone to re-use. What actually executes a Business Transaction is a Business
Transaction Activity, which is the lowest level that a CPP can declare support
of a role. Business Transaction Activities are grouped (and choreographed)
under Binary Collaborations. A Binary Collaboration always describes both
sides. I think that the term Business Service should be used to describe only
one side. 

So I see the mapping as:

A Business Service is a set of software that can perform a set of related
roles in a set of related binary collaborations. Indirectly this means that a
business service (or its associated business service interfaces) declares
support for one side of each of the Business Transactions pointed to by the
roles through the business transaction activities.

(So Marty you were right in your original assertion that service is roughly at
the binary collaboration level).

I don't particularly like the word Action, but if we must use it, it should
probably denote the action that a business service takes in response to a
single request. This is in line with TP's current definition. BPSS actually
has a superclass called Business Action of which  respondingBusinessActivity
is a subclass. So that aligns as well.

I think TRP needs to change their use of the words service and action as you
suggested, or to specify that these are not business service and business
action, but perhaps some lower level service and action.

I will try to draw a slide of this.


>It looks to me like TP, BP, and TRP are not fully aligned with regard to
>the Service and Action constructs in the TP and TRP specs.  I think we need
>a discussion in Vienna
>TP is using the term Business Transaction to denote a request message
>perhaps followed by a response message (as distinct from a signal).  TP
>uses the term Service to denote a set of related Business Transactions.  I
>had thought that this corresponds to a Binary Collaboration but I see from
>the BP spec that Business Transactions are directly under the root element
>(ProcessSpecification).  It is not obvious to me what element groups a set
>of related Business Transactions other than the root and therefore it
>appears that Service is synonymous with the whole ProcessSpecification
>TP is using the term Action to denote a single Business Transaction within
>a Service.
>TRP is using the term Service to denote a single Business Transaction.
>TRP is using the term Action to denote a single process within a Service.
>But if a Service is a single Business Transaction, then it is not clear
>that there is more than one process within a Service and therefore it isn't
>clear that Action has any value.
>In addition, I am having trouble discerning from the BPSS DTD where the
>actual sending and receiving of messages are indicated, what the
>differences are among Business Transactions and Binary Collaborations, and
>how Binary Collaborations relate to Service and Action.
>Martin W. Sachs
>IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
>P. O. B. 704
>Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
>914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
>Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
>Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
>To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
>"unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-tp-request@lists.ebxml.org

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC