RE: 16 Mar. Conference Call notice

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

Christian Huemer wrote:
>sorry, bob i do not agree with the following points. 
[...]
>A business meta model is a model that allows us to describe the artifacts
>of business process modeling. Therefore, the meta model must be completly
>independent of a certain domain. An example should only be used to
>verify/test/explain the meta model.

Christian, do you think the metamodel be independent of the business
domain?  In other words, are you proposing a "process metamodel"
independent of business?

If so, maybe I am in the wrong group and you are correct,
I should be focusing on core components.

But core components right now is focused on relatively
small and relatively standalone components.  There are
much larger more process-like re-usable things-of-some-type
that are embedded in every one of the eight business metamodel
candidates in the ebXML-BP list.  This is the level that I am
interested in - not a very abstract process metametamodel
that does not get down to the level of business in any sense.

Do you think that ebXML should not deal with that level
in any group?

If you are not proposing a totally abstract process metamodel
with no business content, could you please give an example
or in some other way clue me in to what you are thinking of?

(And thanks for the feedback:  this is exactly the kind of 
discussion I think is needed.)

Thanks,
Bob Haugen