[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@intergraph.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:13 PM
> To: Chiusano Joseph; Mark Baker; Michael Champion
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Will The Real SOA Please Sit Down?
>
> Thanks Joe.
>
> Given that pi calculus is a process calculus, is it true that
> no process calculus is particularly relevant and if true,
> why? Is this because the SOA can be considered an enabling
> layer but separate from the process layer?
That is exactly right. We have discussed the notion of POA
(Process-Oriented Architecture) as being separate from SOA, and it's
highly likely that a separate OASIS TC may be initiated at some point in
the future for POA, to extend the work that the SOA-RM TC has done. IMO,
it would be best that this not occur until after the SOA-RM TC has
completed at least one reference architecture (or is at least far enough
along). We'll be tackling reference architecture next, in the very near
future.
Joe
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton
700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
O: 202-508-6514
C: 202-251-0731
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
> The ambient calculus may be relevant to SOA systems given a
> requirement for mobile identity in single sign on systems.
>
> len
>
>
> From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
>
> > Is it fair to say that given orchestration/choreography, a
> composition
> > of processes using services could be described by a process
> calculus
> > such as pi calculus?
>
> Yes - in fact, W3C Choreography Description Language (WS-CDL)
> is based on pi-calculus.
>
> > Readers of the CG list know the sources for this. Lurkers
> may wish to
> > query answers.com for a short overview of pi calculus and process
> > calculus.
> >
> > I wonder if the SOA Reference Model can be described using a pi
> > calculus notation. Really don't know....
>
> Answer from the SOA-RM list: Pi-calculus may be an important
> notation, but it is neither used in the RM, nor is it
> particularly relevant to the RM.
>
|
