RE: Notation to support BPSS

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

I'm trying to figure out why people are re-inventing notation here.
We went through all of this several times before, and every time
ended up with UN/CEFACT UMM being the modeling methodology
and metamodel.  UMM has a standard way of notating both 
business transactions and business collaborations.

The transaction notation (the circular activity diagrams) are most
developed, having also been used by RosettaNet.  

The collaboration level is also an activity graph, although there are
fewer examples.

My understanding of JJ's notation was that he was complying with
the UMM-RNet style for transactions.  Is there really any reason
to invent something new?

-Bob Haugen