[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] ebBP 11/29/2005: IHE Integration Profiles throughebBP...(Files Updated)
Asuman, We are encouraged seeing the user guide for the ebBP Editor you have created. It is generic enough that many user communities could use it. I believe that coupled with an ebBP primer (springboarding off the spec packages and Sally St. Amand's in-progress FAQ) would be quite beneficial to the community. I've already received inquiries. The primer will enable user communities to understand, use and apply (as well as adoption) ebBP v2.0.1. It would be quite beneficial if you, your team and interested parties could attend an upcoming meeting to discuss your efforts, the editor and the profile. [1] We could discuss in the TC the primer concept. In addition, I have had time to review the User Guide, and have several comment and questions: 1. Please provide more details on Business Transaction specialization you reference. There are two important aspects of this (at a minimum) to discuss: * Leveraging the template of BT patterns and operational semantics: When you start with a BT pattern, there are many related profile selections made by collaborating parties or business partners: Document Security, quality of service, non-repudiation of receipt and content, use of which business signals (including user-defined types), etc. Template=>profile of pattern and semantics that meet the parties expectations. * Leveraging a BT pattern to specialize it via the Data Exchange Element: This is a subtle comment related to the intent and definition of the concretized BT patterns themselves, and how they can be leveraged. Let me explain. Select the Business Transaction Type of Commercial Transaction. It requires a Request and a Response. Consider hypothetically that consenting parties determine they do not need a Response in a specific circumstance. They could take the Commercial Transaction pattern and constructs, using the Data Exchange Element. And, define the semantics and structure of their business transaction. Rather it is a user-defined pattern using the Data Excchange element rather than a specialization of the Commercial Transaction itself. The difference is subtle. The BT patterns are based on the patterns defined in the UMM, for international trade (and based on defined intentional assumptions). Their concretized structure and the minimum set of business and operational semantics should be maintained. The BT pattern of which it is based and the specialized BT can be associated. 2. Visualization of a process definition: Have you considered using BPMN? We've used this standard process notation to visually represent our processes in the technical specification. BPMN v1.0 is found at www.bpmn.org:http://www.bpmn.org/Documents/BPMN%20V1-0%20May%203%202004.pdf, and v1.1 (working draft): http://www.bpmn.org/Documents/BPMN%201-X.pdf. This would promote a common notation in visualizing these processes (for process objects). 3. For example for Join, can you please explain intent of simple content, global content and global scope selections? Note, some of this may be due to note seeing other than screen shots of the Editor. Does this relate to the actual type of element or attribute, and what constraints/parameters are applied to its use in the schema? 4. Top-down or bottom-up or in between: The audience and users involved may have preferences of construction for a process definition (termed a profile instance grouped by actors in your work). For example, in the UBL case for UK local government they are developing modular process definitions that can be composed [i.e. BT and BTA and/or CBTA that could be later used in a BC and then BC within BC (CA)]. Others may bound the Business Collaboration by function based on broad domain assumptions (such as all Order processing involves a known set of entities) and then work out the BT used. The continuum is supported in ebBP and communicating this is important in understanding the standard and the use of the Editor. Therefore, in early in the introduction it may be well-served to describe these concepts and the target audiences. This will provide some needed context related to area of interest and work - it could also be tied to a Primer and, as it develops, the ebBP IIC profile. 5. Roles: Ports and roles? Ports may or may not be defined at the point the process definition is created. If a CPP/A is used, a port or delivery channel may be defined and would be associated with the business transaction characteristics of the process definition used. Some may assume this is a WSDL port (i.e. web services) and this may or may not apply....even though you can attach an abstract operation in WSDL to a BTA (an option not a requirement) in ebBP. 6. Abstract partners and the roles they assume: The business partner (exposed as an abstract partner) can assume many roles. Must show that the role is not static as related to a partner. Concentrate on the entity and then the roles assumed (current or performed). This will encourage the intent in the specification and the representation in the Editor are consistent. 7. Annotations and domain-specific ontology: Can you explain this in more detail - is this selecting values or adding values to the specification schema or creating/extending your own? How are the annotations attached to the elements you describe for the BT? These would be points to discuss with the TC (assuming you visit us which would be quite helpful). 8. Use of XInclude: Can only import Package using XInclude. Dale can provide details. Description exists in the specification. 9. What aspects of ebBP are yet to be enabled in the Editor? Again, Asuman we are very appreciative of your work and look forward to our continued collaboration. Thank you. [1] Meetings are typically scheduled 9 a.m. PST each Tuesday. >> mm1: See this progress with health care in using ebBP for electronic >> health records. >> 1. ebBP IHE Profile (draft): > > mm2: Updated: > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15657 > > >> 2. ebBP Editor User's Guide (draft): > > mm2: Updated: > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/document.php?document_id=15658 > > >> mm1: This is an important development to promote adoption of ebBP. >> What is of particular interest here is: >> >> 1. Leveraging registry/repository >> 2. Exercising the v2.0.1 advanced features >> 3. The draft editor under development >> 4. The importance of the patterns and semantic information in this >> domain (which are core capabilities in ebBP) >> >> I encourage your comments particularly on Asuman's questions and my >> responses. Their needs and questions are similar to those we have >> received from local UK government and textiles. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]