Re: multiparty (was) Fwd: Re: message routing

[bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

> bhaugen wrote:
> <snip/>
> >
> > I fully agree that there important unresolved issues of who controls
> > the overall multi-party collaboration, who gets what information,
> > who controls each transaction (which will be different from who controls
> > the overall collaboration), etc.
>
> I can't resist...
>
> Q: In a paper-based multiparty collaboration (e.g. normal business
> operations of today and all of the days before now), who *controls*
> the collaboration?
>
> Oooh! oooh! <raises and waves hand vigorously>
>
> Yes Horshack? <rolls eyes>
>
> A: Nobody!

There are lots of rules for business deals before ecommerce.
It ain't as loosey-goosey as Horshack may think.

My main message here is to look at the business requirements,
that is, the common rules of commerce, for what needs to be
supported in ebXML.  At least as a starting point.

> Why would or for that matter should this be ANY different in e-business?
> IMO, each party in a collaboration, multiparty or otherwise, can only
> *control* its own participation. It can and more than likely should
> know only about the state of affairs between itself and its direct
> partners, not its partner's partners.

In an offer-acceptance transaction, in the meat world, the offerer
controls (decides whether the acceptance closes the deal or not).
In as order-fulfillment collaboration, the party whose commitment
is supposed to be fulfilled decides whether it was or was not
fulfilled.  If I owe you $10 and pay you $9, do I get to say
we're even?

As to your partner's partners, I fully agree with you.  That was
one of my other points - it may all be resolvabled to dialogs.

> Gee, I wonder how business gets done these days without some
> great UML model in the sky telling us what to do every step of
> the way...

Do you really think there are no rules for this stuff?

Have fun,
Bob Haugen