Re: [Fwd: Example Scenarios Used Within the Aerospace Industry]

[Abid Farooqui <farooqui@tampabay.rr.com>]

Looks like I hit a nerve there Mike.
I actually do have a line of work and it is certainly not directly in EDI or
similar. I am an engineer and a computer Scientist and busines problems are
just one thing a computer scientist can work on in conjunction with business
people. I was simply pointing out what I have seen around.
Just consider it a fresh outsider perspective or similar. Standing outside,
I simply cannot come up with a good reason why a PO for an electronics
company would have to have completely different fields and options than a PO
for companies in lets say insurance industry. Now before you go and state
the obvious that the business processes for both these industries are
completely different, think about it from outside the box and outside of
that world. What we are trying to achieve is automation of the business
process. You can divide a business process or any other process for that
matter into unit of works completely independent of each other. If you can't
your approach isn't quite hitting the nail. When this unit of work is
completely independent of any other UOW in the process then this UOW is
serving the exact same purpose for the insurance industry as it is for the
electronics industry. Perhaps what is happening is that we are carrying
information around in the POs that is really not relevent directly there but
is relevent further along after immediately processing the PO. In that case
we have not really defined PO as a completely independent unit of work and
more work is needed and my point was that this is the domain of a standards
body. In the end something like this will make business processing easier. I
hope you see my point.
Thanks for the link to the tutorial. I am familiar with X12 to the point of
understanding some basics but I will make sure to check it out.
Thanks
Sincerely,
Abid Farooqui

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Rawlins" <mike@rawlinsecconsulting.com>
To: <ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Example Scenarios Used Within the Aerospace Industry]


> In response to Abid Farooqui's comments about EDI not being standard,
concerns
> about ebXML going the same way, and his proposed solution, I can only say
this:
>
> Yes, it is a pain (if you want a little more detail about why it's a pain
in
> EDI, I invite you to check out the article of the same name under the X12
> Technical tutorial at my web site:  www.rawlinsecconsulting.com).  But,
you have
> to remember a few basic truths.  Even though it would be ideal if business
folks
> were a bit more aware of some of the IT costs involved in doing what they
want
> to do, it is ultimately business needs that drive things and not IT needs
or
> wants.  We can't put the cart before the horse.  EDI POs and ebXML
compliant POs
> will be different for different companies and industries because the
business
> processes in which they are used are different.  It is as simple as that.
If
> you want the POs to be the same, then the business processes need to be
changed
> - something that probably will not happen in any of our lifetimes.  If you
have
> problems accepting any of this, you probably need to find a different line
of
> work.  There has been at least one other suggestion that a "least common
> denominator" approach such as the one you suggest would work, but it will
almost
> certainly not work because the data requirements of the business processes
will
> not be met.
>
> The context dependent core component work should help ease or at least
make it
> easier to identify the differences in POs, but it won't eliminate them.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-dev-request@lists.ebxml.org