RE: What do people really expect from ebXML? - the Vision "thing"

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

William Kammerer:
>Perhaps the Business Process methodology seems a little heavy-weight
>right now, especially considering the demands of the smaller
>enterprises.  As David Lyon put it: "...most Managers worldwide in SMEs
>wll tell you that they know pretty much know all there is to know about
>a Purchase Order or an Invoice."  I love that line!  But BPM is clearly
>something larger enterprises will demand for choreographing complex
>supply chain interactions, though perhaps not needed by David right now.

Did you read and understand my message about the basic BP Business
Transaction level?  I don't love David Lyon's line, because it assumes
that the business document is all there is to a B2B interaction.
If so, use email.  The BP Business Transaction level requires little
or no methodology, the modeling has already been done, the default
parameters will probably work for most people, and you can get
the current best practices for forming legally-binding electronic agreements
rather than just documents-in-the-email.

This does require ebXML-compliant execution software at each end
of the transaction, but so does MSH (TR&P) and CPA.  You must
pay a lot of money for similarly-capable software now, e.g. for
RosettaNet.  It is quite likely that ebXML-compliant software will
bring the prices down.  Given the open specs, open-source projects
may have started already.

If people understand the basic Business Transaction level,
and that it is all that many companies will need, I would encourage
software creators to provide this basic service level separately
from the more advanced collaboration levels.

-Bob Haugen