No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Choreography description languages have been put forward for capturing sets of interactions and their control and data dependencies, seen from a global perspective. Choreographies serve as starting point for generating interface processes for the different participants which in turn are used for implementing new services or adapting existing ones. However, such top-down approaches are not sufficient for scenarios where given implementations cannot be changed and are to be used as a starting point for choreography design. This paper identifies and classifies three categories of choreography design: choreography identification, choreography context expansion and collaboration unification. Each category is motivated through an example from the eGovernment domain. Existing techniques needed for the individual design categories are discussed and missing techniques are highlighted.

Service-oriented environments facilitate dynamic processes whose properties can be altered during runtime. The transactional support of such processes holds specific requirements that are not completely covered by existing specifications. In this paper, we introduce a life cycle model for transactional dynamic processes and analyze existing specifications with respect to their potentials to support such a model. Subsequently, we propose a framework resolving the weaknesses of existing specifications and allowing comprehensive transactional coordination of dynamic processes.

Current approaches to transactional support of distributed processes in service-oriented environments are limited to scenarios where the participant initiating the process maintains a controlling position throughout the lifetime of the process. This constraint impedes support of complex processes where participants may only possess limited local views on the overall process. In this paper, we present a framework to extend WSBusinessActivity that strengthens the role of the coordinator. We develop a set of rules for deciding on the confirmation or cancellation of participants' work and introduce protocol extensions for monitoring the progress of a process, allowing coordinators to initiate the completion of processes largely autonomously. We discuss motivating examples as well as existing approaches and evaluate our rule set against various service interaction patterns.