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

["Boonserm \(Serm\) Kulvatunyou" <serm@nist.gov>]

Topic like the what are other criteria (above the bpss xml schema) making a
valid BPSS as mentioned by John Yuker is part of the BPSS test we are
interested in, right?

- serm


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
To: "Yunker, John" <yunker@amazon.com>
Cc: "Diego Ballvé" <diego.ballve@republica.fi>; "Martin Sachs"
<msachs@cyclonecommerce.com>; "Sacha Schlegel" <sacha_oasis@schlegel.li>;
<ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] ebXML Business Processes XML instance document for
execution?


Everyone,
Could everyone participating in this thread take on the challenge to get
together and compile a combined summary of what you have discussed
here.  JJ, given your comments and ideas today, I believe you could
input as well.

Topic: Business process execution and BPSS
Some potential boundaries:

    * Computable business process description between trading partners
    * Expressed in the BSI (although I see here there are some differing
      ideas about that)
    * Robust enough to provide an abstract definition of which an
      executable process could be generated

Thoughts?

>John Yunker: The BPSS must be "executable" in the sense that states and
their associated state transitions are well formed and fully defined.
Success criteria would be the ability to simulate the entire business
process and identify model problems such as unreachable business actions and
dead-end paths.  Also, the BPSS expression execution (business process
state) should be what the business users are watching, they won't be
watching the BPEL expression (they wouldn't understand it).
>
>Schlegel: Tks Marty, you got it right. What I failed to add before was the
main point for my comment: lets remember this "abstract definition" is not
part of BPSS, so that we don't polute BPSS with it.
>
>
>>Martin Sachs: I believe that you are really asking for some kind
ofabstract 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.
>>
>>Diego Ballvé: 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??
>>
>>>>Martin Sachs: 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.
>>>>
>>>>Schlegel: 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? PS: I admit that I
did not read any BPEL (or XLANG, WSFL) or WS-Orchestration specification but
the ebXML BPSS 1.0.
>>>>
>>>>