RE: eBTWG Proposal BPSS Revision Project 0.3 DRAFT

[LONJON Antoine <alonjon@mega.com>]

Marteen,

Thanks again Marteen for your clear position and statements.
I would also like to highlight that several points.

1. Executability is a major issue that can only be solved with clear
semantic defined at the XML layer.

2. There is going to be a big next step with UML in its 2.0 version. UML as
any specification needs to be improved. Lots of major issues are going to be
addressed in this revision. My guess is that this is also going to change
UMM.

3. There are outside ebXML a number of other XML specifications for
communication over the internet, especially the webService camp. Nobody can
ignore that the major vendors are investing in that direction. WSFL from IBM
is really a sign of that evolution (WSFL sits on top of webService
definition to define ....... choreography of services .....)
Without a focus the points (4, 5, and 6) highlighted by Marteen, the BPSS
project could become isolated from the implementation world without the
knowledge of people that can grant real executability and .... market
adoption. 

Regards,
Antoine

Antoine Lonjon
Chief Architect
MEGA International
Tel   : 1 781 890 3442 ext 18
Cell  : 1 781 983 1536
email: alonjon@mega.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Maarten Steen [mailto:maarten.steen@telin.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:17 AM
To: ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org
Subject: Re: eBTWG Proposal BPSS Revision Project 0.3 DRAFT


I think all three proposals (Brian's, Karsten's and David's) are close
enough to allow
for a compromise that keeps everyone happy. As I said before, I would
support either
proposal, but I'd like to see the following points addressed in the
final proposal.

In his submission Karsten makes a few very valid points (4, 5, and 6)
that need to be
addressed by the BPSS or the BCSS project:

4. Focus on run-time interoperability, not on modelling.
5. Focus on XML not on UML
6. Focus on executability, not on business modelling.

We have already enough modelling languages, not only for internal
business processes
but also for defining collaborations. What we really need from ebXML is
an exchange
format for collaboration specs. Moreover, this exchange format should be
based on a
sound meta-model for business collaborations and have proper semantics.

Therefore, I'd like to see a work item on defining the semantics of
business
collaborations.

Unlike Karsten, I believe alignment with the UMM metamodel is important.
It defines our
vocabulary, but it does not necessarily have to be the law. Let's put
the UMM
meta-model to the (executability) test. Is it possible to define a
proper operational
semantics for it?

Regards,
Maarten Steen


"Hayes, Brian" wrote:

> Dear Collegues:
>
>      I am submitting for further review the proposal I emailed last
> Friday, Aug 24th (subject: eBTWG BPSS Project Proposal).  The comments and
> Karsten Riemer's alternative proposal have been good input.  I was asked
at
> today's BP teleconference to review Karsten's proposal and see if I could
> come up with a compromise proposal.  There was a good deal of similarity
> between the two proposals.  However found it difficult to envision a
> compromise proposal since the nature of the proposals are significantly
> different.
>
>      Here is a summary of the changes that I made to the version 0.2, Aug
> 24th proposal:
>
> + 1.2 Scope - Changed "and implment in the BPSS the substantive changes
> developed by other projects..." to "and implement limited changes to the
> BPSS recommended by other projects..."
>    [This addresses John Yunker's concern about substantive changes.  The
> limitation on changes is also addressed in the description of the first
> deliverable.]
>
> + 2 Deliverables
>   + Changed schema version in the first bullet to "1.0.1+" from "1.1".
>      [Aligns with Karsten Riemer's proposal, first bullet of Deliverables]
>
>   + Added deliverable
>      - Consideration of renaming of the Business Process Specification
> Schema
>        to the Business Collaboration Specification Schema
>        (This is to differentiate the schema with specifications and
> implementations
>         that address internal "business process," EAI, and workflow)
>     [Addresses Todd Boyle's concern]
>
>   + Changed deliverable "Business Process Specification Schema 1.x and
2.0"
> to
>     "Requirements for Business Process Specification Schema 2.0"
>       (Document requirements for the future version of the specification;
>       the requirements include incorporating other ebXML and related
> standards
>      work and improving its related model and objects)
>     [This captures the stuff that is out of scope for the project but will
> likely be discussed in the course of the project.]
>
>   + Added explaination to deliverable "Identify opportunities to
coordinate
> with other relevant standards"
>      (Includes, but is not limited to, web services standards and
>      internal process flow/language standards)
>     [This captures the web services, XML runtime process languages, and
> other eBusiness standards aspects of Karsten Riemer's proposal.  I think
> this "deliverable" gives the project significant leeway to address
various,
> but relevant, standards.]
>
> + 3 Functional Membership
>    Changed opening paragraph and bullets to
>      "The project team is a group of experts with broad knowledge and
> experience in the areas of national and international business processes
> and
> information exchanges crossing multiple vertical industry and service
> sectors, as well as representation from the technical development and
> implement ion community."
>     [Per suggestion from Klaus-Dieter Naujok]
>
> I hope my changes capture everyone's input.  My new plan is to submit this
> the eBTWG chair on Wednesday, Aug 29th, end-of-business-day.
>
> Best Regards,
> Brian Hayes
> +1 (925) 520-4498
>  <<BPSS-Revision-Project-WIP-O.3.htm>>
>

--
Dr. ir. Maarten W.A. Steen - Scientific Researcher
Telematica Instituut, Postbus 589, 7500 AN  Enschede, The Netherlands
http://www.telin.nl/
phone: +31(0)53 4850 321
fax: +31(0)53 4850 400

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.ebxml.org/ob/adm.pl>