RE: [Xpipe-developers] More web-services, choreography and tools

[Sean M. <sea...@pr...>]

At 10:11 24/07/2002 +0100, Bill de h=D3ra wrote:

>As for orchestration, if orchestration means ordering a set of
>functions, that implies either a scripting language or a way to declare
>dependencies a la make. The WS* specs can call it what they like, but
>they'll deliver one or the other.

I think this standardised approach to orchestration (if it happens) will be=
 the
real advance out of the whole Web Services thing.

There is always a tension between declarative and imperative syntaxes (read=
=20
"xml" or "scripting language")
for orchestration.

If you push too far towards XML you end up with XML based programming=20
languages. This is a well
worn path and the results are not generally terribly well received. For=20
example MID from
the SGML days is the earliest one I can remember. Basically as soon as you=
=20
add a tag
called <if> or <choice> of <while>, you are on a slippery slope to=20
re-inventing yet another
(bad) programming language.

On the other hand, if you go too far the other way, everything gets buried=
=20
in code :-/.

Whats needed in a hybrid approach I think. Historically Javascript has=
 served
as an imperative environment embedded in markup (e.g. web browsers). Much as=
 I
dislike Javascript I would prefer to be able to use it to express "if x >=20
y" rather
than use tags for it.

Sooner or later,the world will realise that the ideal answer simply involves
declaring Python to be *the* universal, embeddable, platform neutral
  OO scripting language.

<grin/>

Sean