RE: Storage of UML models

[LONJON Antoine <ALonjon@MEGA.com>]

Yes David. 
ebXML is concerned by finding a way to use XML for B2B interactions
(Transport, Content, Process); ebXML is no ebUML. 
However, this does not mean that UML modeling is not useful. I am currently
at the OMG conference that takes place in San Francisco. Karsten Riemer is
also attending this conference and I think he feels concern by finding a
mapping between ebXML meta-model and UML.
Concerning XML mapping, I am working with B2B vendors to validate that our
XML definitions can be interepreted by B2B tools.
The resulting DTD should defined what is to stored into ebXML repositories.

Antoine


-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber [mailto:Gnosis_@compuserve.com]
Sent: mardi 12 septembre 2000 17:17
To: Farrukh Najmi
Cc: ebXML-BP@lists.ebxml.org; Allen, Terry
Subject: Re: Storage of UML models


Message text written by Farrukh Najmi
>It is up to BP
and Antoine to recommend what XML form(s)
we would represent UML models in and how that is done.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Farrukh,

No it's not!!!

ebXML is NOT about fixing UML so that it works with XML.

That is someone elses job.  BP is about defining XML to
represent their process models.

If that can be loaded into a UML tool, and if a UML tool
can output it - whoopy dah, but that is NOT our problem.

Other vendors like Popkin with their System Architect
product to name just one, will potentially want to 
support ebXML BP models as XML.   They should not
be excluded from doing that because it is instead in an
internal UML format thing.

Besides that the BP XML should FUNDAMENTALLY 
work with the RegRep - and notice how OASIS Registry
is built already shows you how you need to classify items
to make them part of such as reference system.

This has nothing to do with UML and EVERYTHING to 
do with metadata representation using XML.

Can we please STOP trying to use UML as a band-aid,
before the patient haemorrages or worse!

Thanks, DW.