Re: [ebBP] 11/26/2003: New Work Item - Business rule indicatingconstraints on relationship between bp executions

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Boonserm (Serm) Kulvatunyou wrote:

>Category: Potential new functionality
>Title: Business rule indicating constraints on relationship between business
>process executions
>Description: This work item is inspired by the Inventory Visibilty and
>Interoperability (IV&I) Project. The use case from that project indicates a
>business partner may want to indicate that each partner can execute a
>collaboration with a limited frequency. This kind of requirement can signify
>that the BPSS should have a capability to specify other kind of constraints
>b/w instances of execution. I am not sure if this kind of relationship
>should be in the BPSS or CPP.
>  
>
mm1: Added as Issue 37 (with your accompanying text). May also relate to 
other issues on control flow and execution. Will post the list before 
Monday again with updates (many). Thanks Serm. Monica

>- serm
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
>To: "Boonserm (Serm) Kulvatunyou" <serm@nist.gov>
>Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 2:47 AM
>Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] Groups - New Action Item #0007 Provide IV&I and STAR
>Use Cases
>
>
>  
>
>>>>Kulvantunyou: I am forwarding a whitepaper and a slide which discuss
>>>>about the
>>>>requirements in IV&I project. One issue that the project tries to
>>>>resolve is
>>>>whether to adopt a Push, a Pull, or both model to sync data b/w IV
>>>>tools. I
>>>>believe that from the BPSS perspective it can support either one.
>>>>
>>>>One functionality that I see not existing in the current BPSS spec is
>>>>to be
>>>>able to specify relationship b/w BPSS executions. As described in the
>>>>paper
>>>>that each IV shouldn't push or pull too often. Although, I am not
>>>>sure if we
>>>>would consider this in the scope of the BPSS.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>mm1: We can add this as a potential Work Item.
>>>      
>>>
>>mm2: Serm, can you look at the Work Item process and provide more
>>details? Thanks.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>  mm1: * Provide capability to allow timing of the activities based on
>>>     batch or at the time of receipt. This could affect timeToPerform
>>>     and timing associated with any signals issued.  Determine if there
>>>     are finite timing parameters for the clients to retrieve the data
>>>     for overall business agreement (such as the data must be retrieved
>>>     in 3 hours in order for order response within 4 hours, for
>>>      
>>>
>example).
>  
>
>>mm2: Can you also submit a Work Item for this? Thanks again.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>