[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebxml-dev] ebXML CPA/CPP Estimate
One more note on this before I excuse myself from this discussion for awhile: I seem to have hit a few nerves with my estimate of the ebXML CPA/CPP only having a .2 probability of achieving critical mass (at least as I have defined it). These discussions have caused me to carefully reconsider this assessment, though I haven't changed it yet. What I would like to offer is a more specific rationale for a relatively low estimate, whatever the value is. Again, I will fall back to current EDI practice, since that's the best we have to work with. My experience has been that configuring an EDI management system for a new trading partner in most cases takes only 5% to 10% of the total effort of bringing a new partner into production. Your mileage may vary, but that is less than an hour for me, including e-mails, phone calls, etc. The remaining 90% + of the effort is elsewhere - developing the transformations, testing, etc. Given that we can at best achieve a 10% reduction in effort by automating most of the trading partner configuration, is there sufficient ROI for vendors to implement and end users to use? A few caveats to this analogy: Exchanging information securely over the public Internet using the ebXML MHS requires more configuration options to be specified than is the case with a typical EDI system. So, in the ebXML model the configuration may represent a larger percentage of the effort, and therefore there may be a greater savings from using the CPA/CPP. In addition, if the whole ebXML vision is ever fully realized (which I'm *not* taking for granted any time in the near future) the remaining efforts (that take 90% of the effort in the EDI model) may be so reduced that manual configuration could take much more than 10% of the total effort. This provides additional justification for the CPA/CPP. Open-source, public domain (free or low cost) implementations of the MHS with CPA support incorporated may make CPA/CPP implementation even more likely (but don't expect me to buy into the BPSS!). On the down side, an SME still has to figure out how to fill out the CPP (by whatever means), and what to do when the automated negotiation of a CPA doesn't reach a workable conclusion. Your thoughts? -- Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC