Custom actions in the service modeller

[objectiser]

In the service modeller, I assume that it will be possible for custom actions to be specified. However, based on current ESB configuration, this only requires the action class name to be specified, with an optional list of properties.

However some actions represent one or more associations with other service descriptors (action pipelines), such as:

<action name="routeAction"
 class="org.jboss.soa.esb.actions.StaticRouter">
 <property name="destinations">
 <route-to service-category="ExpressShipping"
 service-name="ExpressShippingService"/>
 <route-to service-category="NormalShipping"
 service-name="NormalShippingService"/>
 </property>
</action>

Will it be possible to define custom actions that similarly have associations with other service descriptors, so that graphically they can display the links?

I would also like to be able to represent two types of link:

(1) control links - where there is an immediate transition (possibly based on a condition)

(2) message links - where the transition will occur as the result of the target service descriptor receiving a message.

Although the target service descriptor associated with a 'message link' would be triggered by a message, and therefore the link is redundant, it does allow the representation of causality between the two service descriptors.

In the behavioural conformance work I am involved in, this information can be useful to compare against a choreography description.

If it is not possible to provide this level of support for custom actions with links, then the next best solution might be to encode specific knowledge of the 'conversation based ESB actions', to enable them to be correctly represented in a graphical notation.

[marklittle]

The whole of the ESB configuration will be changing in the 5.0 architecture, independently of the SOA modeler. The modeler needs to remain ESB/SOI agnostic, but the general concept of services and links (seen in SCA as well) obviously remains. We'll need to figure out how to push the abstract graphical representations of such things down into specific deployment requirements.

Are you interested in getting involved with the modeler :-)?

BTW, when you're talking about the service modeler are you referring to Thomas Erl's donation? I assumed so here, but ...

[objectiser]

I would definitely like to be involved in design discussions, as it could be very relevant to the conversation based ESB action work. Whether I will have time to help with implementation is unknown at this point - but would be interested.

I was not specifically referring to Thomas Erl's modeler - but just expressing a requirement to support the conversation work.

[marklittle]

OK, so I think we should discuss a general architecture before diving into specifics such as ESB actions. Does that make sense to you?

[objectiser]

That sounds like a good idea.

Are there any requirements/design docs, other than Thomas Erl's doc, to outline the requirements from the tool(s)?

[marklittle]

There are some general requirements that we've been discussing internally for a while. I'll try to pull them together and post them here.