OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-core message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: The role of context in the re-usability of Core ComponentsandBusiness Processes - OR Say What???

Hello there,

 Well said. ebXML seems to have abandoned any modelling for core components

Cheers, Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrzej Bialecki" <abial@webgiro.com>
To: "Bob Haugen" <linkage@interaccess.com>
Cc: "ebXML Core" <ebxml-core@lists.ebxml.org>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 12:26 PM
Subject: RE: The role of context in the re-usability of Core Components
andBusiness Processes - OR Say What???

> On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Bob Haugen wrote:
> > Martin Bryan:
> > >The CEN/ISSS project group on Defining and Managing Semantics and
> > >at their meeting on Tuesday [...] expressed a wish that precanned sets
of business
> > >processes be made easily available to SMEs as part of off-the-shelf
office suites.
> >
> > Good!  They are correct! I hope they express their wish to the ebXML
> > steering and executive committees.
> >
> > The ccbp-analysis group has collected a catalog of common business
> > processes that would be a good starting point. The official version will
> > send to QR by March 19.  The catalog does not contain fleshed-out
> > business processes, it is mostly a survey and cross-reference of
> > commonly used business processes from a variety of standards
> > organizations.
> I was lurking on this list for some time now. Let me share with you my
> impressions about the CC (I also participated in that CEN/ISSS meeting as
> a representative of an SME).
> First of all, I had an impression (gotten from the "Methodology for the
> Disc. and Analysis of CC") that this group is convinced and dedicated to
> the use of UML to present models. However, from reading the final
> documents I can see it's not the case, and I can't understand why. That
> Excel spreadsheet is mighty unclear, and it looks like just a heap of
> everything and anything thrown together from various existing standards.
> The UML model recreated from this (that someone sent a week or two ago),
> seems to support this impression...
> Next, I thought that I perhaps missed some unofficial documents that
> present MORE of the core components than just the Party related ones. I
> was very surprised to find out that this is the only catalog of CC
> available. Where is the rest of the core components then, for those who
> want to exchange something more than the Party related information?
> Now, please bear with me one more moment. The SMEs, and not only, are
> waiting with great eagerness for the ebXML project to produce something
> that can be implemented, and which would ensure interoperability and lower
> costs for them to enter the e-commerce arena. Many ebXML spec drafts have
> already been used as a basis for early adopters, as well as strategic
> guidelines, but not the CC, which (as the name suggests) form the core
> needed for exchanging the business information. So, IMHO, many of these
> SMEs will be very disappointed if the CC specification will be accepted in
> its vague and incomplete form, as it basically is today.
> What are my expectations then? Maybe I'm just an isolated case, but I
> think that in order for this specification to be accepted and deployed,
> and if you really have the SME market in mind, these specs must be much
> more concrete. Giving too much freedom is not always good, especially for
> interoperability. They should present a consistent, well normalized model
> that is readable (i.e. a UML representation). And, they should present a
> COMPLETE model of the core components needed to perform the most common
> business exchanges, with the guidelines for extending it. Otherwise, what
> is the practical meaning of this spec if it doesn't guarantee a decent
> level of interoperability? Why should I accept this vague model (that in
> fact places on me the burden of creating my own components) instead of any
> other one (RosettaNet or xCBL comes to mind)?
> As a system architect for an SME, I'm certainly not going to embark on the
> ebXML adventure without much more clear and precise definitions for such
> central concepts. Which is sad, cosidering how many excellent specs this
> project already produced...
> Andrzej Bialecki
> //  <abial@webgiro.com> WebGiro AB, Sweden (http://www.webgiro.com)
> // -------------------------------------------------------------------
> // ------ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve. http://www.freebsd.org --------
> // --- Small & Embedded FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ ----
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-core-request@lists.ebxml.org

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC