RE: Parties and Partners

[Peter Kacandes <Peter.Kacandes@EBay.Sun.COM>]

Dave,

Are you kidding? Are you suggesting that the US Government is not one of the largest 
markets in the whole entire world?

You're damn straight its a market. 

The US Gov't operates all kinds of markets and provides various services in those 
markets with all kinds of trading parties, both foreign and domestic.

If some extreme Republicans had their way, could you doubt that they would insist 
that revenue collection be outsourced in order to improve customer service?

What happens to your tax return when it is being processed by a for profit business 
under contract to the US Govt? Do you doubt that there would be LOTS of businesses 
that would LOVE to bid for that contract? Do you think that all of those bidders 
wouldn't constitue a MARKET?

There are plenty of gov't services that are already run this way, particularly in 
the states.

Dude, man, get a grip!

pk

>Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:28:48 -0400
>From: David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
>Subject: RE: Parties and Partners
>To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
>Cc: ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org, "'Klaus-Dieter Naujok '" 
<knaujok@pacbell.net>
>MIME-version: 1.0
>Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
>Content-disposition: inline
>List-Owner: <mailto:ebxml-architecture-help@lists.ebxml.org>
>List-Post: <mailto:ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org>
>List-Subscribe:  <mailto:ebxml-architecture-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=subscribe>
>List-Unsubscribe:  
<mailto:ebxml-architecture-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-architecture>
>List-Help: <http://lists.ebxml.org/doc/email-manage.html>, 
<mailto:ebxml-architecture-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=help>
>
>Murray,
>
>We can't be advancing the model that ebXML Architecture is
>totally driven by markets.  That is simply NOT true.  Everything
>is NOT a market.  If I'm sending tax returns to the IRS, 
>that is NOT a market.  If I am sending vessel scheduling to a 
>port - that is NOT a market.  If I am sending railcar loading 
>details to AmTrak - that is NOT a market.  If I am sending
>Healthcare claims to BlueCross - that is NOT a market.
>
>We can go on and on thru the list of existing EDI B2B 
>interchanges that are nothing to do with markets.  The ebXML
>work is NOT specific to markets - and never was intended 
>or required to be.  
>
>So - if a party is specific to markets - we should note that.
>
>You noted:
>>>>>>>>>
>No. A 'Party' must somehow be a registered participant in some market.
>>
>
>OK - so already that party has engaged in some agreement.  There is
>no bootstrapping here!!!  The classic Catch 22 - how does the party
>get to the market if they have already to be a party?
>
>That is the difference here.
>
>Then you noted:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>But a Party should not have to enter into pairwise partnerships
>in order to conduct business. You seem to be missing what I am
>saying, and what Peter was saying too.
>>
>
>And you missing what Klaus and I are saying.  Pairwise agreements
>are the Lego brick.  You can build a market with these if you want, 
>but most particularly you can bootstrap any business relationship
>that ebXML will be called on to handle.
>
>I'm done with this for now.  You have now convinced the term party 
>is germaine to handling markets.  Since ebXML is not specific to markets,
>the 
>term trading partner is a correct term too.  A party is as we previously
>noted - someone who has, or is looking to participate.  This 
>allows us to bootstrap and avoids the Catch 22.
>
>Let's agree on:
>
>Party           Any participant in market(s), with, or without
>                                           a formal agreement.
>Trading Partner Partner conducting business transactions 
>                                           according to a business
>agreement as to
>                                           what those transactions consist
>of and 
>                                           compliant with the ebXML
>technical
>                                           architecture. Can be
>point-to-point, does 
>                                           not have to be a market.
>
>And Klaus can provide confirmation from the EDIFACT/CEFACT
>legal team.
>
>Thanks, DW.

Peter Kacandes

Application Planning, Architecture & Strategy	phone number: 	X36529
WWOPS IT/Supply Chain Management		email:	peter.kacandes@ebay