ebxml-tp message

OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

Subject: RE: initial draft of CPP-CPA Specification

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
 Sent: 20 January 2001 00:37
 To: Stefano POGLIANI
 Cc: ebxml-tp@lists.ebxml.org; ebxml-ta-security@lists.ebxml.org
 Subject: RE: initial draft of CPP-CPA Specification


 I mostly agree with everything in this email.  I have embedded a couple of
 comments below.

		I am including in this reply ONLY the relevant parts for further
	Best regards and have a nice week.


 Line 334:
      are you meaning that, in your wording, "business application
functions" is the
      merge of the ebXML-middleware (which is aware of the collaboration)
and of
      the actual back-end systems (the legacy applications currently used
by the
      customer) ?
      If this is true, I have the following comments:
           "The Collaboration-Protocol layer is the interface between the
           CPA-defined business transactions and the business-application
           that actually perform the business transactions"
      The "business transactions" are actually performed by the legacy
      aren't they?

 MWS:  True.  However there will be new applications defined by the BP
model and those
 won't need any bridge between the collaboration function and the higher
level application

	Do you mean new applications that will be developed as already "ebXML
compliant" ?
	I do not understand how new applications will be "defined by the BP model",

 	The "CPA-defined business transactions" are the choreography
 	of the actual business transactions that are executed by the legacy,
 	am I wrong?

 MWS:  This is what the Specification Schema will provide, so I agree.

      So, I interpreted the "Collaboration-Protocol layer" as the layer
which is in
      charge of "instructing" the legacy about which business transaction
      be executed. In my interpretation, this layer is dinstinct from the

 MWS:  I agree for legacy applications.  The bridge to the legacy is where
 choreography will be executed.

		sorry but at this point I do not understand which is the final answer
	to the original question which was :

		I would change "...and the business-application functions..." into
		"...and the back-end functions..."



 Martin W. Sachs
 IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
 P. O. B. 704
 Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
 914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
 Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
 Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC