Re: Sept 27 CoreComponent PT Conference Call details

["Lisa M. Shreve" <lms@wwnet.com>]

Hisanao,

This is an excellent piece of work!  I completely agree with your points, so far.

I would like to contribute one additional piece of thinking.  Typically, when we debate this
topic, examples like address and party are used, which in most of the commercial transactions
[in the open edi sense of the word transaction] are extremely limited in terms of
behavior/methods from an oo perspective.  Most of the methods I can envision for Address are
at the level of formatting and/or validation.  I'd like to bring up more complex cases.

In materials management, a very significant consideration in the business process involves
forecasting and scheduling.  The Manufacturer forecasts demand, and shares that information
with it's suppliers [and so on down the line!], to ensure availability of components.  The
forecasting utilizes a number of economic and business indicators to determine the forecast
[historical seasonal cycles, economic cycles, showroom traffic, etc.].  A Manufacturer might
consider its forecasting capability as competetive advantage!  This Forecast object does
contain and maintain information which is private to the organization, and is therefore not
exposed in Business Messages which flow to the outside world.  My point, CC information
content is != CBO information content.  Therefore CC != CBO - Behaviors.

I don't think this dramatically changes your presentation, but it solidifies the notion that
CC's != CBO's.

Hisanao, I agree that this topic needs to be incorporated into our methodology document, but I
would like to get agreement on termonology before we proceed with incorporation into the
document.  We need to agree on a set of terms, incorporate them into our document, the meta
model, and the glossary.

Great work, again!

lms

Hisanao Sugamata wrote:

> Hello colleagues,
> I cannot participate the conference call, but I'd like to contribute the
> subject (1) : Core Components versus Common Business Objects.
> Attached you can find the chart trying to explain deferences and relations
> between CC Data model and CBO.
>
> Slide(1) shows that CCs are components of XML message and CBOs are building
> blocks of Application.
> Slide(2) shows the concept of FSV in Open-edi reference model. That
> explains CC is a part of the exchanged user data and CBO is a part of the
> executable application program.
> Slide(3) is the class diagram for CC meta model.
> Slide(4) is the example of CC 'Address' accordance with CC meta model.
> Slide(5) is the example of CBO 'Address' extracted from SanFrancisco project.
> Comparing Slide(4) and Slide(5), you can recognize the deference between
> them is the  interface class including methods. Slide(6) explains the
> deference.
>
> I think we should keep our CC model for bridge to the legacy EDI, and CBO
> should be defined adding only one interface class (methods) to
> CC.  Slide(7) shows it.
>
> Slide(8) is the reference for 3-ways to define contexts in XML message.
>
> If my contribution is accepted, I'd like to add the descriptions about 'CC
> vs CBO' to the methodology paper.
>
> Regards.
>
> At 14:43 00/09/25 -0400, Lisa M. Shreve wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >Just 6 weeks until our Tokyo meeting!
> >
> >In order to optimize our output efficiency, we have schedule the following
> >conference calls.
> >
> >The conference calls have been setup for 11:00 am EDT [8:00 am PDT] the
> >following dates:  September 27, 2000, October 11, 2000 and October 25, 2000.
> >
> >US Dial In: (888) 232-0365
> >International Phone Number:  (805) 240-9653
> >Passcode:  989216
> >
> >What follows is the Agenda.  We look forward to talking with everyone on
> >Monday!
> >
> >Lisa M. Shreve & Mary Kay Blantz
> >
> >Agenda:
> >
> >1)  Update on Steering Committee/Executive Committee Actions and
> >Conference Calls
> >    * EC actions associated with Technical Architecture doc
> >    * Core Components versus Common Business Objects
> >2)  Deliverables Status
> >    * Status of deliverables identified out of San Jose
> >    * conference call schedule
> >3)  Proof of Concept Progress
> >    * update on the progress and contents for the proof of concept
> >4)  Track report outs
> >    * Context/Meta Model  --  Arofan Gregory
> >    * Analysis/Patterns  -- Sue Probert
> >    * Domain Groups
> >5)  Work Plan for future deliverables
> >
> >6)  New Business
> >
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                       Name: CCvsCBOx.ppt
>    CCvsCBOx.ppt       Type: Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation (application/x-mspowerpoint)
>                   Encoding: base64
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------
> Hisanao Sugamata
>       ECOM:
>       Electronic Commerce Promotion Council of Japan
>       TEL +81-3-5500-3668     FAX +81-3-5500-3660
>       URL: http://www.ecom.or.jp
> ----------------------------------------------