RE: Comments on TA version 0.9

["Nieman, Scott" <Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com>]

I find it terrifying to hear that some people do not know the real
problems....especially at this stage of this initiative.

Have you ever heard of a "plug-in" or maybe an "adapter"?  Have you ever
been prompted by your browser that you need to install one of these "things"
to view the most updated version of Shockwave?

PERHAPS this is the architecture?

Why?  because of the REAL problems!!

1) the REAL SME does not give a hoot about technology and it should be
ABSOLUTELY transparent to them.  Looking at XML versus looking at CODE is
still LOOKING at technology...make it invisible to them or we fail.
2) there WILL BE YAP (yet another protocol) in a few more years...5, 10,
15...whatever...it WILL happen.  (or should I say YAHP (yet another "hype"
protocol...EDI -->ASN.1--->XML????)

SOOOOOO....the solution scenario...for those who don't get it...

trading partner A uses QuickBooks and wants to buy something...looks into a
registry and finds trading partner B has a suitable product.  trading
partner A and trading partner B have the ebXML messaging service installed.
however, based on trading partner A's profile and trading partner B's
profile, trading partner A is prompted with a dialog box(message) because
the tpp / tpa process states that for the specific collaborative business
process trading partner A needs to install an adapter to talk to trading
partner B.  download the adapter from a ebxml reg-rep with software
components in it and wa-la!  trading partner b gets a PO.    

where does XML fit in?  I am sure we can figure that out...right?

however this same scenario will work for EDI, ASN.1, CSV, or XML... protocol
neutral my friends.  just based on trading partner A and B working it out.

We live in a very troubled world today.  most of the fighting around the
world is based around the "have's" and the "have not's", where the "have
not's" are pretty much fed up with the "have's".  btw, the SME is a "have
NOT".  (anyone been hacked lately???)

It seems to me that this is solution that even a luddite can live with...or
he'll smash his computer and throw it at your face.

Lets move on.

Scott

PS. collaborative business process means "collaboration" as it relates to a
use case realization as it relates to a state machine--anyone in POC having
problems coding yet???  don't have a blueprint?  Or how about code
generation?  I suppose we all forgot about the SWIFT demo in the first
meeting at San Jose??  UML model driven approach - Open-edi implemented.

PPS.  I volunteer at UN/CEFACT to help the have nots.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefano POGLIANI
To: Nieman, Scott; 'Jeff Suttor '; ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org
Sent: 11/3/00 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: Comments on TA version 0.9

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nieman, Scott [mailto:Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 12:57 PM
> To: 'Jeff Suttor '; 'ebxml-architecture@lists.ebxml.org '
> Subject: RE: Comments on TA version 0.9
> 
> 
> .....
> Lets move on...and get back to solving the real problems.
> 

...which are, according to you, the real problems ?


> Scott 
> 
>