[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: BP modeling - followup to Apr 11 Analysis conf call
During the April 11 cc-bp-analysis conference call, I described my notion of how business process models should be developed for ebXML. The conference call attendees requested that I write it up. Here it is. Be aware that this is my opinion, not group consensus (or not yet, anyway). There are several uses of a business process model for ebXML: 1. To develop an XML Process Specification document for use at runtime in conjunction with an ebXML Collaboration Protocol Agreement (CPA). 2. To describe the whole business collaboration process in which the runtime ebXML collaboration is embedded, including business objects for collaboration management and integration points for internal business systems (in other words, developing a practical end-to-end business collaboration process). 3. To enable sharing of business process models through the ebXML Registry and Repositories, which requires putting collaboration process models in context for referencing and discovery. An example of context would be an industry or other business reference model like the Telecommunication industry's TOM model or the Supply Chain Council's SCOR model or the Automotive Industry Action Groups Materials Management model. (A shared model would normally be different from model #2, but there might well be a common intersection.) If the purpose is only to develop #1, runtime XML, the model could be developed using either: a) UML; b) a simplified Business Process Editor as described in the BP Worksheet document, or c) directly in XML using either XML tools or a text editor (for the very brave). If UML is used, the UN/CEFACT Modeling Methodology (UMM) is the mandatory methodology for ebXML. The UMM Metamodel contains the modeling artifacts required to satisfy all of the purposes listed above. If everybody uses UMM, the business process models in ebXML repositories will have a chance at being compatible. The XML Process Specification document for use with the ebXML CPA should be generatable from a model developed using UMM. The ebXML Business Process Specification Schema specifies the format and rules for the XML Process Specification document. This is a subset of the whole business process model spectrum as described in purposes #2 and #3 above. This subset should be compatible with the full UMM Metamodel. The UML diagrams in the BPSS document should not be used as a modeling tool; they should be considered as the design for the Process Specification document. There should be no need or reason to instantiate the classes in the BPSS UML diagrams. The runtime XML should be able to be generated from the UMM model using production rules. For people who want to develop simple limited-purpose business process models, for whom UML is overkill and raw XML is too difficult, Business Process Editors should be developed using the concepts in the BP Worksheet document. (Several vendors already have these in the works.) These BPEs should be able to work at several levels, from simple business transactions to larger collaborations to whole reference models. BPE-generated models should conform to the UMM Metamodel. If they are to be stored in ebXML repositories, it should be in a neutral format that can be shared also by full UML tools. (The BP work group should decide which neutral format to specify, XMI, RDF or whatever.) Respectfully, Bob Haugen
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC