RE: Notation to support BPSS

[Cory Casanave <cory-c@enterprise-component.com>]

For those of who are not familiar with OMG, here are links to the current
documents for EDOC.  Note that this is a rather large and formal
specification.  The part that has the notation of interest is the "Component
Collaboration Architecture" (CCA) which is in part one.  The notation is
specified in section 2.3 of part one and there is also a non-normative
section - "diagramming CCA" which should examples of using both the UML and
CCA specific notations.

Part one - the real spec - http://cgi.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/01-06-09
Part two - Samples and technology mappings:
http://cgi.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/01-06-10

Here is some mapping of terms to help:

BPSS                               CCA
------------------                      -----------------------
Multi Party Collaboration   - Community Process
Binary Collaboration          - Specialization of Protocol
Business Transaction        - Specialization of Protocol
Business Partner Role	   - Specialization of process component
Performs                          - Specialization of Port
Requesting Business Activity - InitiatingRole
Responding Business Activity - RespondingRole
Document Envelope          - Flow Port
Business State                 - Node
Business Activity              - PortActivity
Business Document         - DataElement

At some point when I get the cycles I intend to do a formal spec of the
CCA/BPSS mapping and make it part of EDOC.

Regards,
Cory Casanave
Data Access Technologies
www.enterprise-component.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jean-Jacques Dubray [SMTP:jjdubray@exceloncorp.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, July 18, 2001 3:06 AM
> To:	Cory Casanave
> Subject:	RE: Notation to support BPSS
> 
> Cory:
> 
> where can we find the document that features the current state of the
> notation?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> JJ-
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cory Casanave [mailto:cory-c@enterprise-component.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 5:24 PM
> To: 'A.J. [Tony] Blazej'; ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
> Cc: Kanaskie, Kurt A (Kurt); Jim Clark;
> "jj@exceloncorp.com"@mindspring.com; Karsten.Riemer; Paul Levine
> Subject: RE: Notation to support BPSS
> 
> 
> Tony,
> The work we have been doing with OMG-EDOC (Enterprise Distributed Object
> Computing) may be what you are looking for.  This was kept in-sync with
> ebXML and does include a notation as well as a UML profile mapping.  I
> suggest the EDOC notation be considered, at least as a starting point.  At
> the POC we showed how a BPSS could map to this notation.  The status of
> EDOC
> is that the final proposal has been submitted and will be voted on in the
> next OMG meeting in September.
> 
> Regards,
> Cory Casanave
> Data Access Technologies
> www.eneterpise-component.com
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	A.J. [Tony] Blazej [SMTP:ablazej@openapplications.org]
> > Sent:	Monday, July 16, 2001 5:07 PM
> > To:	ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
> > Cc:	Kanaskie, Kurt A (Kurt); Jim Clark;
> > "jj@exceloncorp.com"@mindspring.com; Karsten.Riemer; Paul Levine
> > Subject:	Notation to support BPSS
> >
> > The Open Applications Group (OAGI) has been hired by the STAR consortium
> > (Standard for Technology in the Automotive Retail) to develop
> > specifications for conducting electronic business between car
> dealerships
> > and manufacturers. The STAR/XML working group involves companies such as
> > GM, Ford, DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, Honda on the manufacturing side, and
> > EDS, R&R, APD and UCS on the dealership management system side. In many
> > ways, we feel this is the first project of its kind, with a magnitude
> that
> >
> > will be hard to surpass. Its success will certainly make a wide impact
> on
> > the success of the ebXML community overall. [See News Release at:
> > http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.070901/211902664 ]
> >
> > We are currently completing the first phase of this project. The
> STAR/XML
> > working group, at our recommendation, has decided to utilize OAG BODs
> and
> > ebXML as the basis of their architecture. We are specifying Business
> > Object
> > Documents as the payload of transactions that run over an ebXML
> > infrastructure. We are specifying business collaborations following the
> > ebXML BPSS specification rigorously. The OAGI will release shortly a
> white
> >
> > papers that details the usage of BPSS and other elements of ebXML.
> >
> > Even though the semantic of the specification suit the needs of the
> > project, we feel that lack of a standard (or de facto) notation is a
> major
> >
> > show stopper for us as we need to communicate the way collaborations
> > operate to both business analysts and technical users. Relying on an XML
> > document to solely communicate the details of the collaboration is far
> too
> >
> > limiting.
> >
> > In the absence of a standard, the OAGI and STAR/XML are planning to use
> > the
> > notation proposed by Jean-Jacques Dubray. However, we would prefer to
> use
> > a
> > "consensus" notation if we can converge on one quickly.
> >
> > Would this working group be interested in tackling this problem? If so
> can
> >
> > we agree on a time table?
> > Tony
> > A.J. (Tony) Blazej
> > Director of Industry Programs
> > Open Applications Group, Inc.
> > 203-966-7388
> > ablazej@openapplications.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