Re: ebXML Requirements WG

["Kenji Itoh" <kenji41@attglobal.net>]

Dear Mike,
Please find attached hereto a copy of my draft on the 
ebXML Requirements is under preparation.
I will be out of office from Dec. 4 to 13 and back to
office on Dec. 14. As I do not bring my computer this time,
I can not reply for your e-mail. Sorry for that.
Best regards,
Kenji

-------------------------------------------------
Kenji Itoh, UN/CEFACT Rapporteur for Asia
Executive Director, JASTPRO
Tel : +81-3-3437-6135
Fax: +81-3-3437-6136
E-mail : kenji41@attglobal.net
------------------------------------------------- 
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 8:14 AM
Subject: ebXML Requirements WG


> I enjoyed meeting you all at the meeting.  I would like to thank you all
> again for volunteering to serve on the requirements work group.  I will
> be on vacation and out for the Thanksgiving holiday this next week - am
> returning to the office 11/29.
> 
> Please consider the following as a start for an outline for the
> document:
> 
> 1)  Introduction - Purpose & Scope, etc.
> 2)  Functional Requirements of an ebXML application
>     Derived from other work group contributions, features of current EDI
> systems
> 3)  Non-functional Requirements on an ebXML Application
>     Interoperability, cost minimization, etc.
> 4)  Requirements of the ebXML Guidelines
> 5)  Organizational Requirements
> 6)  Training, Publicity, Other
> 
> As soon as our web site is established, I will be posting several
> reference documents there, or links to them.  In the mean time, I think
> it would be helpful for any of you who have the interest to do a bit of
> research on non-functional requirements, particularly for EDI.  There
> are two papers on my web site which form the bulk of my masters thesis
> research which you might find helpful.  There are:
> 
> http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/part1.zip
> http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/part2.zip
> 
> Both are in Word 97 format, zipped.  Part 1 introduces a methodology
> called the NFR-Framework, and documents a preliminary set of
> requirements from various sources.  Part 2 uses the analysis to compare
> traditional EDI, XML/EDI using X12-XML, and OO-edi via distributed
> objects.  We may want to consider other approaches to quality analysis,
> but of course I have my bias toward this one ;^).  One that has been
> used extensively is Quality Function Deployment, or QFD.  I don't have
> any links on this, but I'm sure a web search should yield something.
> Tom Gilb also has an approach which is based on QFD - see
> http://www.result-planning.com/  .
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mike
> --
> Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting
> http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/
> 
> 
>

Team1_kenji.doc