RE: Proposed BP PT comments on Requirements

[mrowell@us.ibm.com]

This gets to the question, "Is it the intent of ebXML to provide duplicate
XML-based foundations to those that already exist and are implemented in
industry? Or, does ebXML intend to provide an XML-based foundation that is
complementary to those that already exist? (i.e. OAGI. Rosettanet, etc.)"

I see the opportunity here is to help converge these efforts, NOT to
provide yet another standard that divides the industry.

Thanks,
Michael Rowell
Architect

Open Applications Group            Phone:     704.594.1371
8501 IBM Drive                                Tie Line:  794.1371
Charlotte, NC 28262                        Fax:          704.594.1099

Internet E-mail:    mrowell@us.ibm.com


"Miller, Robert (GEIS)" <Robert.Miller@geis.ge.com>@lists.oasis-open.org on
03/23/2000 10:07:09 AM

Sent by:  owner-ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org


To:   ebXML-BP@lists.oasis-open.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: Proposed BP PT comments on Requirements



I for one have no problem with expanding the scope to include app-to-app
within an enterprise.  ebXML is not about providing specific solutions, it
is about providing an XML-based foundation upon which such solutions can be
built.  By my reckoning, that foundation is as applicable to the internal
app-to-app problem as it is to the external app-to-app problem we call B2B.

Cheers,
       Bob Miller

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Haugen [mailto:linkage@interaccess.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 7:28 AM
To: ebXML-BP@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: Proposed BP PT comments on Requirements


Paul Levine wrote:
>I have taken the opportunity to propose a few other
>revisions that specifically include within the ebXML scope app-to-app
>applications of XML within an enterprise.  This is very important for
large
>enterprises that have networks of operations support systems that have to
>interoperate.

Why duplicate what the OAG is doing in this space?
Is there anything wrong with their efforts?
Is there any real confusion about the generally-accepted
app-to-app standards org?  (Anything like the obvious confusion
about B2B standards?)
What do you think this will do to the scope of ebXML?
Won't it require expanding to include everything in the
OAG standards and then some?

As you can tell, I am resistant to an expansion of scope,
but do not want to misunderstand your proposal.
Can you explain more about why you are proposing it?
And maybe more of the scope of your intention?
(For example, if all you mean is party-to-party dealings within
an enterprise, where "parties" are different business units, and
the same ebXML B2B standards can be used, then my objections
do not hold.  But if you mean any and all internal apps, and
all their integration requirements, I suspect it's a big expansion.)

Respectfully,
Bob Haugen