[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [ebBP] 6/7/2004: Update for WI-12 WSDL Support
Discussion|OASIS.ebBP.WI12-WSDL Support; Topic|; Point|Update on options and proposals; Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00177.html; Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00178.html; Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00143.html; mm1@ I sent out a detailed summary about the discussions on the OperationActivity (or what it name becomes) on 24 May 2004 [1]. Since that time there have been some important discussions, suggestions and inputs from the team, some of which are still under development [2]. We've had two detailed proposals from Anders Tell and JJ Dubray. As John Yunker has intimated, these two proposals can co-exist, in that their use depends on the business environment constraints. Kenji has indicated, and others have agreed that the operations (and MEP) exist below our view of business transaction patterns and business transactions. As John Yunker said (and Kenji alluded to in his response), "If we are not to treat Operation Activity as a specialization of Business Transaction, then we MUST recognize that the Operation Activity lives at a layer of the stack BELOW the business transaction (e.g. the only reason for an operation activity is to support a business transaction)." I think we have to look to our guiding principles from other sources such as UNCITRAL, other UN legal documents and the ebXML eCommerce Patterns (v1.0) [3]. We do anticipate we will be adding more support in a later version. So, this is our first step to lay the groundwork. Here are some additional thoughts and observations from our team as we come to closure on this item and anticipate a vote. * Need to evaluate if both parties have the same information using web services if a message is received. * Differentiate non-repudiation and reliability in messaging from the business process. * Need to accommodate legal enforceability - See reference above. Anders has proposed we have reasonable certainty (in the context of legal enforceability). I think this was envisioned for ebXML from the beginning (see eCommerce patterns). * Web services focus of server only is not the sameas a request-response. However, this does not preclude their use. * The assignment of constraints including the business semantical relevance of dispatch and reach will likely occur above the web services that are directed. * Multiple web services operations map to a business transaction. They appear to live at different layers of abstraction (CPA binding and web services). However, trading partners may choose not to use signals and use messaging to provide state information [4]. * Here's a BPSS component hierarchy and summary of possible proposal provided by Kenji: o BC -> BT -> BusinessAction -> DocumentEnvelope -> BusinessDocument o Document Envelope maps to message exchange and are a lower abstraction than ebMS. o If we accept web services as a component / realization of business transaction, we can simply rely on CPPA's WSDL binding work. I would like to bring this proposal to today's call: * Allow Kenji to provide a short proposal on the DocumentEnvelope. * Enable use of web services via the OperationActivity or through the DocumentEnvelope proposal (these two may become a combined or updated proposal). I'll call it 'thingy' for now until a decision is made. * Consider that for v2.0, with the capability to extend the business transaction patterns, a group of trading partners could decide to define their own that includes the 'thingy.' The planned extensibility supports Anders' suggestion to define a highly constrained business transaction pattern. * Consider for v3.0, we consider a technical note that addresses how use of web services is accomplished and with more research how that occurs in the context of a constrained business transaction pattern. Further definition defined by the team. Please be ready to discuss in today's call as there has been quite a bit of complementary traffic on this and related issues since our last call. Thanks. [1] Summary: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00143.html [2] Comments from Kenji Nagahashi: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00177.html; and http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200405/msg00178.html Comments from John Yunker: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200406/msg00015.html and http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200406/msg00013.html [3] ebXML eCommerce Patterns, v1.0: http://www.ebxml.org/specs/bpWS.pdf [4] We have not resolved as a team if this results in state alignment. @mm1
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]