I quote from the EAI Journal article, "Don't Discount BizTalk" from the
April, 2001 issue (available online, see
http://eaijournal.com/Article.asp?ArticleID=323).
"... BizTalk has been criticized for not supporting the World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) standards. Rather, BizTalk is based on [older] standards."
My experience with BizTalk is that the schemas we used with it were not
compatible with W3C standard compliant tools. We had to modify the schemas
to get them to work with BizTalk. Now, perhaps BizTalk is not up to date
with Microsoft's latest efforts. It is currently using MSXML3.0, not
MSXML4.0, at least in the recent version we evaluated.
I really don't want to disseminate misinformation, but currently, BizTalk
Server currently does not seem to be compliant. Perhaps I was being too
general in my earlier statement w.r.t. Microsoft's overall XML, XSL, etc.
W3C compliance.
didge
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan - Blue Lotus Software [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 12:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Work flow RFC
This is incorrect information. Microsoft invented schemas, and included
them in their products before they were standardised. This older version of
schemas is called XDR. It is what is used with the MSXML parsers from v2.0
to v3.0.
The entire .NET line-up from Microsoft used the XSD specification (the W3C
specification for XML schemas). The .NET line-up uses MSXML v4.0, which is
completely standards compliant (this is coming from a Java programmer that
uses Apache's XML tools). They are 100% compatible with the rest of the
world's tools.
-dan
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
org]On Behalf Of Frye, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 7:47 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Work flow RFC
Keep in mind that Microsoft uses there own version of DTDs and XML Schemas
that are not W3C conformant. You would then have to use their XSL tools,
which, of course, would be Wintel-based. This would not make for a very
platform independent solution...
didge
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Tataryn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 11:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Work flow RFC
Ahhh, thanks Dan. I didn't realize it spat out a workflow file....
Thanks,
Craig.
Dan - Blue Lotus Software wrote:
> I think you misunderstood me. I'm not suggesting any SOAP interfaces or
> anything. I'm simply suggesting using Visio's workflow editor to create
> workflows that can be imported for Struts workflows. This should be able
to
> be done by simply creating 2 XSL files: one to convert Visio's workflows
> into Strut's, and one to convert Strut's into Visio's.
>
> My primary point was to say that the next release of Visio has a workflow
> editor, it outputs an XML file, and the XML format will likely be public.
>
> -dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
> org]On Behalf Of Craig Tataryn
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 6:52 PM
> To: Dan - Blue Lotus Software
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Work flow RFC
>
> I don't want to be platform specific though w.r.t. any tools generated
from
> this TODO. However, if someone wanted to create a Visio addin for the
> front-end and some SOAP interfaces to the support objects I wouldn't
oppose
> it.
>
> Craig.
>
> Dan - Blue Lotus Software wrote:
>
> > It would be nice if we could integrate directly with Visio. Microsoft
is
> > pushing Visio as their workflow editor for BizTalk. Basically, it
allows
> > Visio models to be connected to real code through the use of XML files,
> > pretty much as you have suggested (except without the XSL stage--the
file
> > format Visio writes is read directly).
> >
> > At the XML One conference in London a few months back, I asked the two
> > Microsoft guys that were demoing a beta of the Visio workflow stuff
(from
> > the upcoming .NET version) if they planned to publish the DTD. They
> didn't
> > really know. However, given their commitment to open standards with XML
> > (yes, I said that with a straight face), the DTD will likely be released
> to
> > a standards body.
> >
> > If this is the case, building XSL documents to handle the conversion
each
> > way should be straightforward.
> >
> > -dan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
> > org]On Behalf Of Craig Tataryn
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 5:29 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Work flow RFC
> >
> > Hi, I would like your comments for the workflow item on our TODO list.
> > Currently this is how I've envisioned the workflow project:
> >
> > 1) A nice GUI type Applet or Application that has visual constructs
> > which can be connected in a Visio type manner to create an Activity
> > diagram or some other type of flow diagram.
> >
> > 2) This diagram will be persisted in an XML file which holds meta data
> > for the elements in diagram (position, type of construct (controller,
> > flat html page, cgi script, flow arrow, etc..)).
> >
> > 3) The diagram can be exported to a struts config file via XSLT (i.e.
> > workflow.xml -> workflow2struts.xsl -> struts-config.xml)
> >
> > 4) A diagram can also be imported from a struts-config.xml file via XSLT
> > (i.e. struts-config.xml -> struts2workflow.xsl -> workflow.xml). Of
> > course some sort of "pretty layout" code would have to be used to
> > un-jumble the mess of constructs that are sucked out of the
> > struts-config.xml file (i.e. take a guess at proper positioning
> > information).
> >
> > The GUI should employ some sort of extensibility mechanism like BSF
> > (http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/projects/bsf) or Bean Shell
> > (http://www.beanshell.org/) to allow users to plug-in their own
> > functionality (i.e. validation code) without jeopardizing the core code
> > (what I call the Emeril Lagasse technique -- BAM!).
> >
> > I realize this is a very high level look at the TODO but I think as we
> > get more comments we will get more granular and can start dishing out
> > segments.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > <tataryn:craig/>
