Re: Subject: RE: eBTWG Proposal BPSS Revision Project 0.3 DRAFT

[bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

From: LONJON Antoine
> The debate is reaching a very interesting point.
> I definitivly agree that there are two kinds of audience,
BusinessAnalysist
> and Technical engineer, and therefore that we need two views for the same
> problem. At the same time, everybody recognizes that these two views have
to
> be related to each other. The BPSS project is that attemp.
> On the business model side, I am not sure that the language of choice is
the
> state language.

Antoine and all,

Why wouldn't it be better to do the business modeling in business terms,
using business semantics and logic (for example order-fulfillment instead
of state-transition-guard)?

That's what we started to do with the ebXML BP Worksheets, and
will continue with the Collaboration Patterns.

They are *not* the same as the BPSS, they only need to be able
to generate or map to a BPSS instance.  (In ebXML v1.0, this was
not part of the BPSS project team, it was done by the CC-BP-Analysis
group.  Yet another reason to keep all the ebTWG projects in sync,
collaborating with each other, instead of splitting the BPSS project
off on its own.)

If you want to get fancy (and I know you can do this), develop a
domain-specific graphic representation for the business semantics.

-Bob Haugen