RE: [ebBP] 3/28/2004: Production Rules WI-5 [RSD]

["Yunker, John" <yunker@amazon.com>]

jey@
This work item should be disposed of easily, the production rules were required because UNCEFACT dictated a UML version of the BPSS content (process model).  The architecture at that point required that the BPSS XML be produced from the UML, hence "production rules".

With that architecture the well-formedness existed in the UML model.  By removing the UML model we remove the requirement for production rules, but also remove the well-formedness (semantic completeness) provided by the UML, hence the need for well-formedness rules.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:Monica.Martin@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 8:52 AM
To: Yunker, John; ebXML BP
Subject: [ebBP] 3/28/2004: Production Rules WI-5 [RSD]


Discussion|OASIS.ebBP.WI5-Production Rules;
Topic|;
Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200402/msg00061.h
Attachment|tml;
Point|From production rules to well-formedness rules;

mm1@
In the F2F in February, we discussed this briefly this work item:

Work Item 5-Production Rules
Describe boundaries for production rules in BPSS. Note: Starts to 
provide boundaries between what is needed in a business collaboration 
and what translates down to the engine.

Important points

    * It's original intent was to support UML to XML transformation.
    * Integrity checking is needed for the XML.
    * Production rules will be replaced with well-formedness rules.

Allocation:

    * v2.0: Document that production rules will be replaced with
      well-formedness rules. Gather requirements.
    * v3.0: Define well-formedness rules. Provide in technical
      specification and schema.

I would propose that we:

    * Define a summary statement in the v2.0 technical specification
      about production rules and their initial and future usage. These
      production rules or guidance have existed in ebXML BPSS since
      v1.01 (1.05, 1.1).
    * Close this work item for v2.0 only.
    * Work will continue in v3.0.

I would encourage your thoughts and we can bring up under Other Business 
in tomorrow's meeting.

John (and JJ, Martin), I would encourage your feedback here as you may 
have some ideas regarding the well-formedness rules that may apply. Thanks. @mm1