On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:20:09 +0600, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > However, I think there's room in the WS project for an effort > focused purely on implementing BPEL. BPEL is a key component of > the WS-* stack and I for one would be happy to see a pure BPEL > effort in Apache.
Same here. ;) I think that BPEL is the one of most important requirements which BPM should have. > In fact, IBM for one is moving its workflow product to support > BPEL only and no other flow language. So workflow and WS > orchestration are merged under BPEL. Well... I'm not sure whether this is the right place to talk about IBM thing... but it's somehow related to Agila. so I'll give this a shot. Is it official policy of IBM that supporting only BPEL not any other 'process definition languages'? Will there be NO chance of IBM supporting 'WS-CDL' (http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-cdl-10/)? Maybe I need some more homework though, it seems like to me that WS-CDL has many to do with BPEL. WS-CDL is as important as it's spec made in W3C. I hope to see Agila(or Apache-BPM-engine) could run both BPEL and WS-CDL. -- Uijin Hong (íìì) http://runeconsulting.com/heartbit/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
