Re: [ebxml-bp] 3 different parts: private business processes ::public businessprocesses :: messaging

["David Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Sacha,

To paraphrase Duane - "that's *not* what I said!"  ; -)

The whole point of the XML2004 Interop Demonstration
is to use standard ebXML XML and mechanisms - not
proprietary ones - and this was demonstrated exactly!

The binding between Registry and ebMS and CPA all
using standard parts - such as http-binding to the registry,
and then looking at the use of the ebxml message
envelope and standard fields for indicating service/action
and that relating to the CPA and the BPSS.

I suggest you look at the presentation, source code
and documentation more closely.

We had six different implementations all working
together using the same mechanisms.

Thanks, DW


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sacha Schlegel" <sschlegel@cyclonecommerce.com>
To: "David Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>
Cc: "ebXML BP" <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] 3 different parts: private business processes
::public businessprocesses :: messaging


> Hi David
>
> See comments inline.
>
> Am Montag, den 07.02.2005, 16:24 -0500 schrieb David Webber (XML):
> > Sacha,
> >
> > I believe the White Paper here - and the implementation we developed
> > for XML2004 Interop addresses all these questions directly - and even
> > provides source code!!
> >
> > See :
> >
> >  http://ebxmlbook.com/benefits
> >
> > and
> >
> >  http://ebxmlbook.com/interop
> >
> > This is why I have been saying that the new ebSOA shall describe how
> > to take advantage of the new enhanced ebXML.
>
> ebXML technical architecture should show one or two example how it can
> be done (also from an implementers view).
>
> >
> > The nice thing is that you can move from Classic ebXML to Enhanced ebXML
> > seamlessly as your needs dictate.
> >
> > Therefore - the answer to your questions is "Yes!".  It is possible to
mix
> > and match
> > these as necessary to obtain the level of service and interactions that
you
> > need.
>
> So its up to the implementor. Providing interfaces between the
> components is an implementors choice. The interfaces will be
> proprietary.
>
> If I have decided to use the MSH of Independet Software Vendor (ISV) X
> which does not support BPSS I am stuck with that and cannot add a BPSS
> component of ISV Z.
>
> Please correct me if I got that wrong.
>
> Regards
>
> Sacha
> >
> > The CPA and BPSS relationship are at the heart of allowing you to manage
> > this -
> > and if you look at the XML2004 Interop presentation - you can see how
this
> > is done for the various participants.  Even allowing management of
> > "provisioning"
> > for partners from "test" to "production".
> >
> > Thanks, DW
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Sacha Schlegel" <sschlegel@cyclonecommerce.com>
> > To: "ebXML BP" <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 3:42 PM
> > Subject: [ebxml-bp] 3 different parts: private business processes ::
public
> > businessprocesses :: messaging
> >
> >
> > > Hi ebBP team
> > >
> > > Sorry for stirring up the TC but I came across one or two important
> > > questions and I would like to continue discuss these questions.
> > >
> > > I paste the same email as I sent to the ebxml-dev list.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Sacha
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi ebxml-dev community
> > >
> > > Having seen productive ebXML messages exchanged between ebXML Message
> > > Service Handlers that were configured with an ebXML CPA in real world
is
> > > pretty cool. ebXML Business Processes are used for CPA generation and
> > > documentation.
> > >
> > > But still not there, yet ...
> > >
> > > I am looking forward to see ebXML Business Process being putting more
> > > into the right perspective for B2B. Introducing ebXML business
processes
> > > in the form of playing an active part in the B2B business
collaboration
> > > seems to be one of the next steps.
> > >
> > > There are the private business processes or legacy backend
applications
> > > at each party and now we introduce the public buisness processes [2]
> > > between the parties. ebXML messaging is providing interoperable,
secure
> > > and reliable ebXML message exchange between the parties.
> > >
> > > So amongst others, here are these three components:
> > >
> > > 1) private business processes and legacy backend applications
> > > 2) public business processes (ebXML)
> > > 3) messaging (ebXML)
> > >
> > > The question is how to get these three components to work nicely
> > > together.
> > >
> > > a) Combining 1 and 2 and 3?
> > > b) Having specified interfaces between each?
> > > c) Combining 1 and 2? or Combining 2 and 3? (also needs an interface)
> > > d) Leaving it open?
> > >
> > > Any other approaches and directions?
> > >
> > > A point I want to make here is, if interfaces are a solution, we have
to
> > > define them, otherwise we cannot take the next steps.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Sacha
> > >
> > > [1] typically for the parties to understand the collaborative business
> > > process
> > > [2] Synonym to shared business processes and business collaborations
> > >
> > > PS: I did not introduce registry and core components or other
components
> > > which also need consideration.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>