RE: Classification and discovery

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by Bob Haugen
>several members of the BP group met with them
>in SJ; Marty did an overlay diagram showing how TPA
>mapped to the current BP metamodel; we decided
>in general how the different models would be merged;
>etc. 
>It was a very collegial process by the worker bees.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Bob, yep, nothing every happens without good
people investing time and good reasons being
out there.

>f) Lots of this happening, everyone agrees
>     that ebXML GUIDE makes sense and 
>     we go back to b) and make a decision.

I don't see how you can call it ebXML GUIDE yet.
You are representing this as if it were already
adopted by RegRep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You've been pressing me to say this - and 
I've been studiously avoiding it!  Right now 
it's in the RegRep discussion document and as 
you noted above with the TPA example all the
touch points and reasons why are being 
expressed.  This is now all about touch-n-feel
and how comfortable people are with what 
they see.
<
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Note, I am not saying it does not
make sense, but (for example) it looks like
you have embedded a workflow-like process
model in your classification schema,  where one 
element is linked directly to the one next and previous 
elements.  BP rejected that kind of model in our first 
meeting, for reasons that I could go into in detail
if necessary, but the point is that many design
decisions have been made in each working group
that GUIDE appears to override.  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That is exactly why the GUIDE spec' is out there
in its current form - PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE if
you have something better for workflow - lets 
get it done and replace it with what you have.

It was never intended to be anything more than
a simple place holder in lieu of to aid understanding
of the big picture.  It actually even SAYS that in the
GUIDE spec's - that this will be replaced by what
BP/CC are working on!

I keep saying though - where is this BP XML????
<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So even if GUIDE were a good idea, the degree
of overlap is so great that it would be a long
and difficult negotiation process to get all the
working groups to even consider it, given the
tight schedules everybody is on anyway.
<

Oh yeah?  Look it Bob - that's what we HAVE TO
DO.  It's called ebXML - if we don;t do this - nothing
works.   I don;t buy this 'difficult process' thing.
OASIS have looked at this for two years, we have
the underpinning, and when you see the RegRep
work I believe you will see that putting it all together
is where we are at and the time is now.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So if RegRep won't champion it, I don't see
how it is a practical answer for BP.
<
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yep -and over 300 people downloaded the 
GUIDE spec's in one day, and over 50 signed
up for the mailing list.

The bottom line on this is we cannot duck this
bullet.  We need the functionality that GUIDE is
encapsulating any which way you want to slice
it - and GUIDE is one heck of a jump start in 
the right direction to getting to the solution.

With an open public team effort behind this we will
move this the rest of the way.

Thanks, DW.