|
Mark,
Thank you for your comments. It's interesting
that you identify intuitive as a quality that the solution must have.
When I consider how long this problem has persisted, how to develop ec messages
that are implementable by SME's [therefore, emphasizing interoperability],
intuitive is the last quality I would have expected to be a
requirement!
However, I agree with you --- it shouldn't take a
phd for business experts to specify what their information requirements
are. I contend that the CC team has viewed this as one of its requirements
--- at a lesser level than interoperability --- but, certainly a
requirement. It is this requirement which has caused the team to assess
every tool, methodology, and technology proposed, and if the benefits didn't
exceed the effort, the team did not enthusiasticly embrace the
proposal.
As for the intuitive process you are looking for,
it is the intent of the discovery and analysis document to provide
this. The next version you see will include 3 fundamental processes, 1)
document requirements, 2) discover existing core componentry to meet your
requirements, and 3) the analysis of the gap, those information requirements not
satisfied by the existing core components, for a) identifying core support for
the requirement, b) proper use of core by the solution, c) potential extensions
to the core.
Clearly, the analysis is roughly equal to the tech
assessment process in edi circles, and I contend that different audiences will
use the information in the document, and a clear distinction must be made ---
potentially different documents. Either way, that is the document that is
supposed to describe your intuitive process. Please provide specific
comments to the document as to where you think it needs improvement.
As for the architecture, each document does try to
describe the architecture at some level, but I agree that the current documents
fall short. The overview document ultimately is where this description
needs to go, and I expect that what you see in Vienna & coming out of Vienna
will be what you are looking for. However, I will say that I don't expect
that the architecture is intuitive --- it is the magic that makes it possible
for the usage to be intuitive. Users can use web browsers without needing
to understand the underlying technology that makes their surfing
possible!
lms
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 6:09
AM
Subject: RE: Just what is a Core
Component? Well, it depends on what "is" is.
Lisa,
If the definition in the glossary is correct, then I
respectfully submit that the remainder of the ebXML CC documents are less
than effective in that they do not provide an intuitive process with which to
develop a core component, nor do they adequately explain the larger core
component architecture you identify.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Shreve
[mailto:lshreve@mediaone.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:58
PM
To: CRAWFORD, Mark; ebXML Core
Subject: Re: Just what
is a Core Component? Well, it depends on what "is" is.
Mark,
I think the question you meant to ask is, what
is the core component architecture. It is probably clear, having had
discussions about context, extension, core components --- even in this
discussion thread --- that there is a lot more depth to this issue than
a simple definition of a single term in a very innovative
architecture.
But, if you are only interested in a
definition, the one in the glossary is the agreed upon one. I believe
that it accurately describes one aspect of the CC architecture, the core
component.
If you think there is more that needs to be
added to the definition, your constructive input is welcome and
appreciated.
lms
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 8:03
AM
Subject: RE: Just what is a Core
Component? Well, it depends on what "is" is.
William (or should I say William JJ?)
Very
interesting, however the question still remains - where in the single
expected ebXML core component specification (or in any of the supporting
documents identified in the is a firm definition of a core
component. The latest version of the discovery and analysis document
still doesn't explain what it is we are discovering and analyzing.
Each of the ebXML CC Documents have vague references to the concept of a
core component, but I have yet to find a clear definition, much less a
more detailed explanation of the concept of core, in any of them (and that
includes the BP and CC overview document). I know the ebXML glossary
has a definition ( lowest level, industry neutral building blocks which
are used within the construction of ebXML business processes), but does
that really say what we need to say. I don't think so as one of the
most frequently asked questions I receive from folks when I am talking
about ebXML, is what is a core component. And the questions are
usually from folks who have tried to read the draft documents. If
they don't get it, what hope do we have of anyone using this
stuff?
If I am missing
it, perhaps the editors can point out the exact location for my tired eyes
(too many ebXML specs, not enough resting time!)
Mark
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:wkammerer@foresightcorp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:55 AM
> To: ebXML Core
> Subject:
Just what is a Core Component? Well, it depends on what "is"
> is.
>
>
> Mark Crawford asked "when are we
going to see a standard definition of
> what a
core component is?"
>
> There's stuff under the legend "Core Component Definition
and
> Relationship with CBOs" at the ebXML Core
Components page at
> http://www.ebxml.org/project_teams/core_components/Method.htm,
which
> includes
CC-Definition_2000-10-18.doc. This was contributed by Mike
> Adcock, dated 2000-10-18 (see, I'm using ISO 8601
Extended Data
> formats!!). It seems like a
workable definition, and is accompanied by
>
pictures and diagrams. Is there anything wrong with this
> document? And
> if so, why is it still available at the web site?
>
> William J.
Kammerer
> FORESIGHT Corp.
> 4950 Blazer Pkwy.
> Dublin, OH USA
43017-3305
> +1 614 791-1600
>
> Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/
> "accelerating time-to-trade"
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with
the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to:
ebxml-core-request@lists.ebxml.org
>
|