RE: TPA and ebXML Header question

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

Krishna Sankar wrote:
>	I do agree that we should show that complex business collaborations and
>processes can be developed using ebXML, during POC. But the primary goal of
>the POC is to show the implementations and practicality of ebXML
>specifications. The POC cannot and should not go "ahead" of the
>specifications.

Part of my point in my last message was that some support for complex
conversations is already baked into the BP spec.

>	We all know that any of the participating organizations can develop very
>exotic processes independently but can they develop these processes over
>published ebXML specifications is the question. 

I don't think that "real" order acceptance is very exotic.
Or order fulfillment.  Or Order-Fulfillment-Payment.

>	My major concern is that the POC looses the momentum as soon as a
>conference is over and then picks up about 3-4 weeks before the next
>conference ! (After Tokyo, the year end and Christmas will take up time
>until, again, we will be 4 weeks away from the next conference ;-0) One of
>the things I am looking for is to keep the same POC team and keep on forging
>ahead and have Vienna as the end game, with Vancouver as the mid point. We
>should table the scenarios as we think of them (kind of a POC portfolio) and
>add them to the POC while making sure that we can show traceability to the
>ebXML specs.

I agree 100%.  That's why I am interesting in lightly discussing 
scenarios for Vancouver now, and putting some of them on the table
in Tokyo.

>	I think we are still on target - in SJ we concentrated on TRP, in Tokyo we
>are showing off RegRep and the theme in Vancouver should and would be BP
>with complex interrelated business processes.'

That works for me, but I would start with simple interrelated 
business processes.  I would like do at least one negotiation
scenario, though.

>	Another idea is to have a demo room (in the ebXML website) where we can
>show different processes based on ebXML, that way we are not restricted to
>the POC to show the breadth and depth of the ebXML efforts.

That sounds like a good idea to me.  You are talking about the web site,
so it wouldn't detract from the POC efforts for the meetings.

Thanks for continuing the conversation,
Bob Haugen