Re: ebXML-CP: Process Categorization: UN/CEFACT Structure -DevelopmentWorking Groups

[Scott Hinkelman/Austin/IBM <srh@us.ibm.com>]

>I am a X12 meeting where there are several individuals who are members of
>CEFACT. This list represents their work team breakout. They are often
concerned
>about cross integration, it is not clear if this  is the categorization
they
>would now recommend. I will bounce this off of them.

>Jim

Great Jim.
This information absolutley should be bounced off of the participants
working
in X12. But the ebXML CC team needs bouncing priority.

There are indeed experts such as Paula Heilig (Worldspan) (both
organizations) who has
influenced/presented the content of some of this (TTL) into vertical
standards bodies
such as OTA (nothing to do with EDI) for the Travel industry; or Melanie
McCarthy (GM) (both orgs also).
These folks, that actually live in the domains, should
be driving all of the catagorization layouts, like Sharon Kadlec (NW
Ailrlines) did
with the context chart, but priority work in ebXML.

What ever happens, the ebXML CC team gets the last call. There are folks in
ebXML CC
that are not in the EDI groups that deserve this priority.

Thanks,
Scott Hinkelman, Senior Software Engineer
XML Industry Enablement
IBM e-business Standards Strategy
512-823-8097 (TL 793-8097) (Cell: 512-940-0519)
srh@us.ibm.com, Fax: 512-838-1074



"James D. Clark" <jdc-icot@lcc.net> on 10/03/2000 09:18:10 AM

To:   Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>
cc:   "'ebxml-ccbp-analysis@lists.ebxml.org'"
      <ebxml-ccbp-analysis@lists.ebxml.org>
Subject:  Re: ebXML-CP: Process Categorization: UN/CEFACT Structure -
      DevelopmentWorking Groups



Your observation is correct. The breakdown is more organizational in
structure.

Jim

Bob Haugen wrote:

> >This may be an appropriate process categorization scheme for ebXML.  It
> >would be interesting to findout if they (UN/CEFACT) would recommend the
same
> >categorization.
>
> I wouldn't.  I bet it was a historical accident, based on who attended
> some meeting after lunch.
>
> Are these industries or departments of a business or a combination
> of both?  (E.g. Insurance vs Tourism vs Statistics.)
> No manufacturing?
> D6  Finance vs D14  Accounting, Auditing, Reg. & Fin. Services?
> Material Management in automotive supply chains encompasses
> procurement of direct materials.
> Etc.
>
> It's a hodgepodge.  (Not that most categorization schemes aren't...)
>
> Sorry to be so negative,
> Bob Haugen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Hayes, Brian [SMTP:Brian.Hayes@Commerceone.com]
> Sent:   Monday, October 02, 2000 3:24 PM
> To:     'ebxml-ccbp-analysis@lists.ebxml.org'
> Subject:        ebXML-CP: Process Categorization: UN/CEFACT Structure -
Developme       ntWorking Groups
>
> >From the UN/CEFACT "About UN/CEFACT", I found following structure for
the
> "development groups"
> (http://www.unece.org/cefact/knowlg/structur/index.htm):
>
> D1  Material Management
> D2  Purchasing
> D4  Transport
> D5  Customs and Taxation
> D6  Finance
> D8  Statistics
> D9  Insurance
> D10  Travel, Tourism And Leisure (TT&L)
> D11  Healthcare
> D12  Social Security, Employment & Education
> D13  Directory & Management Support Services
> D14  Accounting, Auditing, Reg. & Fin. Services
> D15  Environmental Management & Safety (EMS)
>
> The numbering scheme was taken directly from the organization chart and
is
> non sequential.  Groups D3 and D7 are not on the chart.
>
> This may be an appropriate process categorization scheme for ebXML.  It
> would be interesting to findout if they (UN/CEFACT) would recommend the
same
> categorization.
>
> Brian