RE: POC Press event Ideas

[Yoshi Russell <yoshi.russell@xmls.com>]

Hey guys,
    First of all let me apologize to the whole group, especially to Nick,
Sid and Mark, for not attending the press event in Tokyo and our Friday
session there.  I got caught up with a client issue that required me to sit
in my room and code for several days.  JP was unavailible and then I was
required to go to Korea the next week.  Now that I'm back and Thanksgiving
is over, I'm ready to roll!!!
	From the emails I'm still a bit unsure what is exactly going to
happen in the press event on the 12th.  Has an agenda been set yet?
	Thanks alot.  Looking forward to seeing all of you at the next
face2face.
				Yoshi

-----Original Message-----
From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 5:52 PM
To: Ebxml-Poc
Subject: FW: POC Press event Ideas


FYI.

-----Original Message-----
From: Susy Struble [mailto:susan.struble@eng.sun.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 2:08 PM
To: Hatem ElSebaaly; 'Philippe DeSmedt'
Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com;
steven.yung@sun.com; ebXML poc; 'Krishna Sankar';
susan.struble@jurassic.eng.sun.com; nick.kassem@eng.sun.com
Subject: Re: POC Press event Ideas


Following up on Krishna's note:

I think Krishna captured the essence of the issue around the demo for the
12/12 press event: the goal of this event is **marketing exposure** (e.g.
press coverage) rather than technical exposure. Because of this goal, the
requirements are quite different. The demo portion needs to be short and
snappy. The overall time for the event needs to be short -- the press are
always on deadline, and even getting an hour from them is tough. We need to
spend our time stating our key, high level "takeaway" messages. And then
saying them again. Then again. One more time. And then wrapping it all up,
once again (and again) reiterating our key messages. For those of you who
might not have been involved in a marketing-centric event before, it can be
painful :)

Our goal for this event is to get the press to write immediate coverage with
positive ink. We hope that they'll write that ebXML will become the success
it should be based on its technical merits, that it's delivering early, and
that there are numerous vendors supporting and involved in this effort. Most
press aren't going to stop there -- they'll want to hear what vendors have
product roadmaps for supporing ebXML, what vendors think ebXML will mean for
their customers and markets. This is the part that makes the news real. It
is because of this that everyone's participation is essential. This event is
a great marketing/PR opportunity for all vendors involved -- it'll be a
one-stop shop for the press to hear everything and ask questions of vendors.
They love this, it makes it easy for them.

I'm sorry that most of you couldn't make the marketing call yesterday. I
more than understand the short notice - Internet time isn't good for
scheduling meetings. I urge you to connect w/ your marketing counterparts,
who -- if they were on the call yesterday, and we did have a good turnout --
will be able to also explain the value of the format and proposed event, as
well as how we plan to coordinate and to make certain that this is well
worth everyone's time. I won't go into details, but it'll basically be set
up like a mini-tradeshow for the press. As well, Steve Yung should be (or
maybe already has) forwarding you the meeting minutes along w/ a draft
showflow outline and messages. I can't post to your alias and so am relying
on him to keep you updated. Steve can also walk everyone through this in
your POC meeting next week.

The value to your companies will be marketing/PR exposure.

A question you need to answer is is it worth the time of your technical
resources to attend *if* you're not involved in the demo, in which case
you'd send just a marketing contact? Like Krishna noted, we could possibly
launch into another demo after the planned event if there was enough
interest. But again, I fear that given the press' time constraints, this
won't happen.

I hope this provides some clarification on our thinking.

Regards,
Susy


----- Original Message -----
From: Hatem ElSebaaly <hatem@ipnetsolutions.com>
To: 'Philippe DeSmedt' <PDeSmedt@viquity.com>; Hatem ElSebaaly
<hatem@ipnetsolutions.com>
Cc: Ed Julson <ed.julson@eng.sun.com>; <carol.geyer@oasis-open.org>;
<susan.struble@eng.sun.com>; <Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com>;
<steven.yung@sun.com>; ebXML poc <ebxml-poc@lists.ebxml.org>; 'Krishna
Sankar' <ksankar@cisco.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: POC Press event Ideas


> Phillipe,
>
> Thanks for replying.
>
> That would work for IPNet. We need to finalize ASAP so that we
> can test and so on.
>
> Sig would that work for IBM?
>
> Thanks
> Hatem
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philippe DeSmedt [mailto:PDeSmedt@viquity.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 10:57 AM
> To: 'Hatem ElSebaaly'
> Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; susan.struble@eng.sun.com;
> Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com; steven.yung@sun.com; ebXML poc; 'Krishna
> Sankar'
> Subject: RE: POC Press event Ideas
>
>
> Hatem,
>
> Thanks for your note. At Tokyo, we had both the GCI and AIAG scenarios. As
> some of the participants are no longer there, it looks like we'll have to
> settle for one of them. If IPNet and IBM participate, we can certainly
show
> the AIAG scenario, but we'll need to change it somewhat: at Tokyo, Viquity
> played the role of hub in the GCI scenario; if we do away with the GCI
> scenario, we'll need to find another place for the Viquity hub. The
logical
> place would be as a hub between IPNet and IBM. Would that work? As far as
> IPNet and IBM are concerned, the only change to be made would be to use
the
> hub's URL to post to, rather than the final destination's. Any objections
to
> that scenario?
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Philippe
> _______________________________
> Philippe De Smedt
> Architect
> Viquity Corporation (www.viquity.com)
> 1161 N. Fair Oaks Avenue
> Sunnyvale, CA 94089-2102
> (408) 548-9722
> (408) 747-5586 (fax)
> pdesmedt@viquity.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hatem ElSebaaly [mailto:hatem@ipnetsolutions.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 10:33 AM
> To: 'Krishna Sankar'; Philippe DeSmedt
> Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; susan.struble@eng.sun.com;
> Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com; steven.yung@sun.com; ebXML poc
> Subject: RE: POC Press event Ideas
>
>
> Krishna,
>
> IPNet is planning to participate. I was under the assumption that
> we would use the same demo that was done in Tokyo. Has the plan changed?
>
> If NetFish or IBM participate then we should be all set.
>
> Do you if NetFish or IBM will participate?
>
>
> Thanks
> Hatem
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 2:51 PM
> To: Philippe DeSmedt
> Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; susan.struble@eng.sun.com;
> Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com; steven.yung@sun.com; ebXML poc
> Subject: RE: POC Press event Ideas
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks. From what I know, the GCI Vs AIAG depends on the
> participants
> (marketing is neutral on this) - IBM and IPnet. And we need to include our
> esteemed contemporary Philippe which means a hub in the setup ;-)
>
> I like the CGI Marketplace scenario better, but then how would we
> include
> IBM and IPNet ?
>
> cheers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philippe DeSmedt [mailto:PDeSmedt@viquity.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 2:32 PM
> To: 'Krishna Sankar'
> Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; susan.struble@eng.sun.com;
> Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com; steven.yung@sun.com; ebXML poc
> Subject: RE: POC Press event Ideas
>
>
> Krishna,
>
> Thanks for the suggestions. From what I heard through a colleague who was
on
> the ebXML marketing team's conference call this morning, they're leaning
> towards showing the GCI scenario versus the AIAG scenario (marketing
folks:
> please correct me if I'm wrong). As far as Viquity is concerned, we can
play
> in either scenario. I'll leave it up to IBM and IPNet (with input, of
> course, from anyone who has an opinion either way) to decide which one to
> show. Other than that, the proposal appears to provide a pretty good
balance
> of participants as well as of areas of ebXML to cover in this event.
>
> -Philippe
> _______________________________
> Philippe De Smedt
> Architect
> Viquity Corporation (www.viquity.com)
> 1161 N. Fair Oaks Avenue
> Sunnyvale, CA 94089-2102
> (408) 548-9722
> (408) 747-5586 (fax)
> pdesmedt@viquity.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 2:22 PM
> To: ebXML poc
> Cc: Ed Julson; carol.geyer@oasis-open.org; susan.struble@eng.sun.com;
> Simon.Nicholson@eng.sun.com; steven.yung@sun.com
> Subject: POC Press event Ideas
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here is a preliminary POC plan for the press event. Please think
> thru and
> see if this is workable, fair and includes everybody who wants to
> participate.
>
>
> Start with Nick's POC slides (Nick)
> Go to the Architecture slide upto the point where the three
> transparent
> boxes appear showing the design, configuration and run time. (Mark)
>
> Go directly to the TPA track - intro slide (Krishna)
> TPA track sequence diagram (Krishna)
> TPA Track topology
> Farrukh's GUI (Farrukh)
> Shows interoperable registry by Sun, XMLs and
> Sterling
> Mark's GUI (Mark) showing TPA formation
> Fujitsu-Netfish (showing TPA Proposal) (Iwasa,Sanjay)
>
> *********** Question : Do we have NetFish and Fujitsu
> participation to
> show this ?
>
> Introduce AIAG track (Sid)
> AIAG Track - Marketplace example
>
> IPNet - Viquity - IBM
>
> *********** Question : Does this make sense ? Can
> IPnet/Viquity/IBM work
> this out Or
>
> Should we do the GCI track with
> IPNet-Viquity-IBM ?
>
> end of demo
>
> *********** Did we leave out anybody ?
>
> My approximation is this will take about 25 minutes.
>
> Ed/Susy/Steve,
>
> We need 20-25 minutes to show the breadth of vendor participation. I
> think
> it is Ok as we need to show that this is real and many companies *have*
> stuff working across their products.
>
> If we have three screens as follows it would be good:
>
> #1 projector with 4 or 8 monitor switch to show buyer side
> #2 projector with 4 or 8 monitor switch to show seller/supplier side
> #3 projector tied to one computer to show the slides
>
> In Tokyo, we had two projectors and used one for the slides. So we
> switched
> between the buyer/seller with one projector
>
>
> cheers
>