RE: XML Gave A War, But Nobody Came

[paulgiles@NC.SLR.com]

Bob,

EIDX (Electronic Industry Data exchange) and CopmTIA (Computing Technology
Industry Association) have combined efforts to develop a guideline and
business process addressing the purchase order management process. Both
these organizations have combined their efforts to "adapt" the guidelines
and standards to meet RosettaNet specifications. 

The need to develop and maintain an Electronic Data Interchange (EDI; ASC
X12, EDIFACT, EDIJ, EDIMAN, XML, B2B, Flat File, etc.), is mandatory to
reduce overall cost, reduce effort and increase cycle time in the supply
chain. Standards and guidelines, and common processes go a long way to
enable the electronic sophisticated companies to communicate effectively.
The business requirement to "enable" customers and suppliers to
electronically communicate today is hampered by the exchange of the data
dictionaries and glossaries defining the language and syntax we are using.
As a Contract Manufacturer (CM), I have an infinite number of customers, and
an infinite number of suppliers any of which can change at any time. I also
have a large percentage of customers and suppliers who are not "electronic
capable". I can not expect each and every SME to have the capability and
resources to become "electronically capable". To this end I believe any
third party software developer who can insert themselves, via Web pages and
forms, or software applications, into the gap, will benefit everyone if they
used a standard, framework, structure,    and/or guideline to develop their
product. If these third party entities would develop "Com/DCOM", Class
libraries or such, capable of being used by SME's or sophisticated
electronic capable companies it would aid in the interfacing and integration
of electronic commerce, using the standards, frameworks, guidelines, etc.,
developed.

Sorry for rattling on but I believe in "Global" standards and guidelines,
common processes and no hassle. I am also a fan of "Com/DCom", OO,
Components and/or anything that can be used to develop with a "cafeteria"
mentality.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Haugen [mailto:linkage@interaccess.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 11:31 PM
To: ebXML@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: XML Gave A War, But Nobody Came


Jon Bosak wrote:
>While I agree that it's not possible in most cases to define a
>single *simple* standard PO (or whatever) that will suit all
>purposes, I believe that it is possible (a) to define a horribly
>complex standard PO that will suit just about all purposes, and
>more interestingly (b) to define a reasonably small number of
>standard POs that will serve just about all purposes.
>But only time will tell whether the second hunch is right.

(not to pick on Jon out of context, but I need a quote to hook 
my question:)

Has anybody made a commonality and variability analysis
of purchase orders in EDI to determine how much is
common and where the variability resides?

(That might help to ground some of this discussion.)

Respectfully,
Bob Haugen
(who doesn't even like purchase orders...)