Re: [ebxml-bp] ebXML Business Processes XML instance document for execution?

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Marty,

I think we can submit some usage cases on this to Monica - and then
derive from that what a generic set of requirements looks like.

That would help us understand what we're really looking for...

I know on the call today someone mentioned that the CPA team
have been working a usage case with BPSS and figuring out
gap-analysis.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Sachs" <msachs@cyclonecommerce.com>
To: "Diego Ballvé" <diego.ballve@republica.fi>
Cc: "Sacha Schlegel" <sacha_oasis@schlegel.li>;
<ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 5:01 PM
Subject: RE: [ebxml-bp] ebXML Business Processes XML instance document for
execution?


I believe that you are really asking for some kind of abstract definition
of the interface between the ebXML specifications and the execution
engine.  I agree that this is an essential part of a set of specifications
like ebXML but so far, there has been little interest in defining it other
than the somewhat limited information under the title "BSI" (Business
Service Interface) in the BPSS and architecture documents.

Regards,
Marty

At 05:55 AM 11/3/2003 -0700, Diego Ballvé wrote:
>I support the idea of BPSS instance being "executable" but I
>think that there's a need for a 3rd configuration document,
>besides BPSS and CPPA, that would link a BusinessTransaction
>activity with some legacy system that would generate/consume
>business documents (for instance a BPEL engine, as in David's
>example).
>
>I don't think that this is part of BPSS since is partner
>specific, not necessarily public knowledge, but a BP can't
>be configured to be executed by a BP engine without it -
>unless it is a simple exchange of static documents.
>Comments??
>
>Regards,
>Diego
>
> > Martin Sachs wrote:
> >
> > In my opinion, the BPSS instance document should contain
> > enough information
> > to be executable.  I believe that that has always been the
> > intent of the
> > ebXML side of things.  Strictly speaking, "executable" is the
> > wrong term.
> > The BPSS instance document should be able to be deployed into
> > the runtime
> > system.  In other words, the BPSS document should be able to
> > be used to
> > configure the runtime system to execute and monitor the
> > business process
> > that it describes.  That's the same idea as deploying the CPA
> > into the
> > runtime system to configure it for doing business between the
> > two partners
> > that agreed to that CPA.  Such a runtime system is sometimes
> > referred to as
> > a BSI (business service interface) in ebXML lingo.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marty
> >
> > At 01:15 AM 11/2/2003 -0700, Sacha Schlegel wrote:
> > >Hi ebXML BP TC
> > >
> > >Coming backwards from a CPA (sample Negotiation CPA) to the ebXML
> > >Business Process (sample Negotiation Business Process) I thought that
> > >the BP XML Instance document should have enough information to be
> > >executable.
> > >
> > >But for some reasons I now think that I misunderstand.
> > >
> > >Any hints where to catch up on ebXML BPSS, what it is and
> > what it isn't?
> > >
> > >Kind regards.
> > >
> > >Sacha Schlegel
> > >
> > >PS: I admit that I did not read any BPEL (or XLANG, WSFL) or
> > >WS-Orchestration specification but the ebXML BPSS 1.0
> > >--
> > >------------------------------------------------
> > >Sacha                                   Schlegel
> > >------------------------------------------------
> > >4 Warwick Str, 6102 St. James, Perth,  Australia
> > >sacha@schlegel.li                www.schlegel.li
> > >public key:            www.schlegel.li/sacha.gpg
> > >------------------------------------------------
> >
> > *************************************
> > Martin Sachs
> > standards architect
> > Cyclone Commerce
> > msachs@cyclonecommerce.com
> >
> >
> >

*************************************
Martin Sachs
standards architect
Cyclone Commerce
msachs@cyclonecommerce.com