| Program |
 |
|
|
|
| Find in Program |
|
|
|
|
| Page |
|
|
|
|
| Basket |
|
|
view, help
"Protocols for Processes: Programming in the Large for Open Systems"
|
|
|
|
Protocols for Processes: Programming in the Large for Open Systems
Ballroom C
Tuesday, 16:15, 45 minutes | 7 | · | 8 | · | 9 | · | 10 | · | 11 | · | 12 | · | 13 | · | 14 | · | 15 | · | 16 | · | 17 | · | 18 | · | 19 | · | 20 | · | 21 |
Munindar Singh, North Carolina State University
Amit Chopra, North Carolina State University
Nirmit Desai, North Carolina State University
Ashok Mallya, North Carolina State University
The modeling and enactment of business processes is being recognized
as key to modern information management. The expansion of Web
services has increased the attention given to processes, because
processes are how services are composed and put to good use. However,
current approaches are inadequate for flexibly modeling and enacting
processes. These approaches take a logically centralized view of
processes, treating a process as an implementation of a composed
service. They provide low-level scripting languages to specify how a
service may be implemented, rather than what interactions are expected
from it. Consequently, existing approaches fail to adequately
accommodate the essential properties of the business partners of a
process (the partners would be realized via services)—their
autonomy (freedom of action), heterogeneity (freedom of
design), and dynamism (freedom of configuration).
Flexibly represented protocols can provide a more natural basis
for specifying processes. Protocols specify what rather than
how; thus they naturally maximize the autonomy, heterogeneity,
and dynamism of the interacting parties. We are developing an
approach for modeling and enacting business processes based on
protocols. This paper describes some elements of (1) a conceptual
model of processes that will incorporate abstractions based on
protocols and roles; (2) the semantics or mathematical foundations
underlying the conceptual model and mapping global views of processes
to the local actions of the parties involved; (3) methodologies
involving rule-based reasoning to specify processes in terms of
compositions of protocols.
|
