Talk:Business Process Execution Language

Updates on 2/19

Added more information that might not get included in the final BPEL spec. I thought this information was important in understanding BPEL so I added it to the wiki. I also added some statements to help clarify the concept of Abstract processes and the relationship to executable processes.

BizTalk

Isn't Biztalk a BPEL engine?70.18.196.34 13:01, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, BizTalk Server 2004 added a BPEL import/export capability - I added this to the page.

WS-BPEL

Since the name of the standard has changed, shouldn't this page be at least cross-referenced with WS-BPEL? Clicking the WS-BPEL link on the page redirects to the same page.

Borland Together

Borland Together 2006 also provides eclipse plugin for GUI business model design and BPEL generation --The plugin has been added, this section can be removed.

Intersting take

"As numerous "small" programming languages already existed (e.g., C, C#, and Java), computer scientists felt no need to introduce another."

Huh? C, C# and Java are themselves recent developments, not to mention Ruby, Python, Perl, Clean, etc. etc., all of which were either introduced in the last 10 years or so, or have at least seen dramatic uptake. Further, Java 1.5 is a significantly different beast from Java 1.4, which itself is different from 1.3, etc. It seems unlikely that any of these will be seen as the last word.

I'm going to change this to say that while there are many "programming in the small" languages, there weren't many for "programming in the large". While I'm at it, I'll change "realization" to "notion" in the previous text. Given that "large" languages are at present much less widely deployed than "small" ones, it remains to be seen whether new languages are required (but that depends in part on what you call a "language" as opposed to, say, a "data model".) -Dmh 19:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam ?

Why is the page tagged as spam ? I only see legitimate links in the External links section.