RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group

["Welsh, David" <David.Welsh@nordstrom.com>]

ebXML's BPSS is basically a more precise declarative statement of the overall BP needs (a business operations view - BOV) to the runtime technical architecture (the functional service view - FSV). BP BOV needs specifically include business transactions as well as collaboration needs.

BP's needs derive from the actual busine$$ requirements, which get modeled in TMWG's N090/UMM, and then are rendered to a specific instance of a BPSS.
The ebXML's technical architecture FSV (TRP, RegRep, ...) has a rich set of technical service alternatives which need to come together is a very specific 'service' to support the specific BP needs; 'to make the business deal work'.

As the CEFACT side of the house is currently looking at their own past work programs, to embrace the business operations view of ebXML (Business Process and Core Components) in their new work programs, it might be the case that OASIS has the same opportunity in this case of BTP and ebXML on the
OASIS side of the house. 

I believe BTP was begun before OASIS signed the Memo of Understanding with CEFACT, to jointly continue ebXML development; so there might be a timing issue causing the question of overlaping objectives.

'Conflict' might be a strong term, and I've heard how to form a TC but I'm not familar with the OASIS TC on-going workings, so perhaps someone at the OASIS management level would get involved here align the TC work on the OASIS side of the house ?

-Dave
ps. I was under the personal impression that CEFACT and W3C were, or had, discussions to form a Memo of Understanding; from some statements made at the last ebXML Vienna meetings.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Haugen [mailto:linkage@interaccess.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:02 AM
> To: 'Krishna Sankar'; ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
> Cc: business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group
> 
> 
> The ebXML BPSS and UN/CEFACT UMM also have a 
> transaction protocol and transaction patterns.  It is also
> the same as the RosettaNet transaction protocol, and
> the lower-level business signals that enable the transaction
> protocol are also embedded in the ebXML Message Service.
> The transaction patterns are declarative.  I suspect the
> reason even ebXML people don't recognize this is that
> they have focused on the procedural choreography aspects
> of the BPSS.
> 
> So I think there is a possibility of a major conflict, although
> I have not read the BTP protocol.
> 
> -Bob Haugen
> 
> P.S. I probably can't successfully post to the Oasis BT list,
> so Krishna, maybe you can forward this message.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Krishna Sankar [SMTP:ksankar@cisco.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, July 05, 2001 1:15 AM
> To:	tony.am.fletcher@bt.com; ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
> Cc:	business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject:	RE: ebXML in W3C?  and OASIS Business Transaction group
> 
> Tony/James,
> 
> 	Haven't seen any takers on this. So let me take a first 
> stab at it. Here it
> goes:
> 
> 	The BTP TC has very focused charter - to develop XML 
> based *protocol* for
> long lasting transactions across different enterprises over 
> the internet. I
> don't see any conflict with the BTP and the ebXML Business 
> Processes. In
> fact, I think the BTP will compliment and complement (:-)) and make it
> easier for the ebXML business process (in the areas of trx across the
> internet).
> 
> 	just my 1c (lost the other c in the market :-( in case 
> anybody is
> wondering)
> 
> 	What are other views ? Also, what exactly is the 
> overlap ? I haven't seen
> the MOU. Is it available on the web or can someone send me a copy ?
> 
> cheers & hope you all had a productive July 4th
> 
> 
>   |-----Original Message-----
>   |From: tony.am.fletcher@bt.com [mailto:tony.am.fletcher@bt.com]
>   |Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 7:37 AM
>   |To: ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
>   |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group
>   |
>   |
>   |Dear All,
>   |
>   |submit BPSS to W3C?
>   |
>   |Seems rather funny to me.  UN/CEFACT is an arm of the United
>   |Nations and you
>   |can't get much more international than that, can you?  For all
>   |the good work
>   |that it has done, at the end of the day W3C is a US based 
> not-for-profit
>   |organisation.  I agree however that there is a practical 
> challenge for
>   |UN/CEFACT to produce output that commands the status at least
>   |that accorded
>   |to W3C outputs.  I also agree with a perception mentioned 
> below that the
>   |W3C, up till now at least, has been seen as tackling the 
> more the syntax
>   |issues, whereas OASIS and other organisations have tackled the
>   |application
>   |of those syntaxes.  The messaging (protocol) area is 
> clearly a grey one
>   |where W3C may have a role to play.  However, I would have 
> thought that in
>   |the business process area UN/CEFACT and OASIS should be able to
>   |stand-alone
>   |under the banner of ebXML.
>   |
>   |Talking of OASIS, I noticed with concern, the post from 
> James Bryce Clark
>   |that indicated that OASIS has started up its own new TC on business
>   |transactions.  I would appreciate it if someone would 
> clarify rationale
>   |behind this, else I hope that OASIS will immediately close 
> this group and
>   |direct the participants to the ebXML business process 
> group instead.  If
>   |there is not a clear statement or swift action from OASIS people
>   |will wonder
>   |what the value of the MoU is.
>   |
>   |Best Regards Tony
>   |
>   |A. M. Fletcher
>   |BTexact Technologies
>   |    01473 644526     +44 1473 644526      m +44 (0) 7740 739490
>   |   Fax: +44
>   |(0) 1473 646291
>   |   Callisto House /261/pp46 (B81-MH), Adastral Park, 
> Martlesham Heath,
>   |Ipswich  IP5 3RE    UK
>   |  tony.am.fletcher@bt.com
>   |
>   |British Telecommunications plc
>   |Registered Office - 81 Newgate Street,  London,  EC1A 7AJ
>   |Registered in England no 1800000
>   |
>   |This electronic message contains information from British
>   |Telecommunications
>   |plc which may be privileged or confidential. The information is
>   |intended to
>   |be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. 
> If you are not
>   |the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
>   |distribution
>   |or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. 
> If you have
>   |received this electronic message in error, please notify us by
>   |telephone or
>   |email (to the numbers or address above) immediately.
>   |
>   |
>   |-----Original Message-----
>   |From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
>   |Sent: 03 July 2001 23:31
>   |To: ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
>   |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? (was) Re: 2 July BP meeting 
> notes and 16 July
>   |BP meeting notice
>   |
>   |
>   |Hi all,
>   |
>   |	From what I know and hear and talk, W3C is more fundamental in
>   |nature and
>   |OASIS is more "application" oriented. XML, Encryption, 
> DSIG,.. all fit in
>   |the W3C bucket. But things like registry, business process,
>   |ebXML fit in the
>   |OASIS bucket. Of course, there are always exceptions.
>   |
>   |	IMHO, OASIS should be arbitrator on things like WSFL, 
> registries,
>   |... And
>   |like James pointed out, OASIS should establish a 
> relationship/precedence
>   |work with W3C. And yes, it would be a shame if ebXML ends up as
>   |preliminary
>   |work/science projects towards other standards which cannibalize
>   |and nibble
>   |ebXML away :-(
>   |
>   |	just my 1c
>   |
>   |cheers
>   |
>   |
>   |------------------------------------------------------------------
>   |To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
>   |"unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-bp-request@lists.ebxml.org
>   |
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-bp-request@lists.ebxml.org
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-bp-request@lists.ebxml.org
>