[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ebBP 1/5/2006: freebxmlBP Editor and Notes
Today, I've posted screen shots and abbreviated notes from our call 3
January 2006 for the freebXMLBP editor from METU. Many thanks to Ozgur
and Yildiray for the demonstration and presentation.
Screen shots
Public site:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16091&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Meeting minutes
Public site:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16092&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Here are some questions and observations from the demonstration
(evidenced from the questions asked and the functionality we understand
may be planned). I encourage the METU team to comment [1].
1. externalDocDefRef: Are there plans to implement new features that
will exist in v2.0.1 Committee Specification (to be voted on this
month after brief 15-day review)? This would include the
externalDocDefRef that allows external information to guide which
logical business documents are used and how. [2]
2. Patterns and operational semantics: Can you provide greater detail
on how the editor uses the patterns matrices and operational
semantics? What plans for the tools exist in this area?
* In support of the patterns matrices, do you plan to support
the quality, document security and other QoS capabilities
described? This is actually more than the core schema. For
example, two (or more partners) may choose to use the
Business Transaction [3] of type BusinessTransactionType. In
the patterns matrices (Section 3.4.9.1), the patterns become
like templates, where parties select: BT pattern (including
request and response), business signals (some signals are
required by pattern), non-repudiation of receipt and content
(some patterns require these be used), etc. To that end,
this likely necessitates more than a core schema can provide
or constrain. Taking you example, the Provider and Seller
choose the Commercial Transaction of type
BusinessTransactionType, business signals are highly
recommended and the partners select to use them, and
non-repudiation and document security capabilities are
required. Note, that I've not included everything. The
template that the pattern matrices provide require
selections by the participating parties that in essence
becomes a profile. [4] In order for the patterns to be used
effectively, these guidelines (matrices and resulting
profile) are quite important. And may be even more so for
the health care domain. Note these are observations and
comments to emphasize their effective use and importance to
business transactions in eBusiness. Some constraints or
profile items may be:
o A Requesting and RespondingBusinessActivity are required.
o If a CommercialTransaction pattern is used, the
signals are highly recommended for use. Have you
thought about use of signals other than those defined
by ebBP? This is allowed by the core schema.
o Non-repudiation of receipt and content is required.
o hasLegalIntent is false by default to encourage
partners to explicit select 'true.'
o documentSecurity is required.
o Guaranteed delivery is strongly recommended.
3. Package: The package element is also important as there you can
XInclude another package. This also allows inclusion of modular
process definitions (which is why likely that Sacha asked this
question). Are there plans to use this feature in the tool?
4. Condition expressions: When XPath is used, does the tool verify
the syntax of the expression is valid? My notes are a bit sketchy
here.
5. Ontologies:
* Can you verify if the semantic classes are added to the BT
or the BTA? The reason that I ask is that the BTA is more
specific to the expectations of the involved parties, i.e.
it binds the roles to the BT. The BT (and the BT pattern it
uses) are more generic reusable components. I can see either
argument to associate semantic annotations to the BT or BTA
but would welcome more details on the functionality and
reasoning behind it.
* Are the semantic annotations classifed and associated with
the process definition in a registry? Where are the semantic
details found?
6. Patterns:
* When you change the pattern minimal requirements, the
DataExchange pattern is recommended for use. That gives a
user community full reign to add semantics and develop their
own pattern within the constraints of the schema definition.
* In the case of semantic annotations, I can see that the
concrete patterns are used as the ontology tree is outside
of the process definition (but provides guidance to its
usage). If the syntax of the concrete patterns is changed, I
would recommend use of the Data Exchange pattern element
(i.e. the semantics and syntax are open for revision).
However, I'd encourage other team members to comment.
I would encourage others to ask questions and provide observations too.
I feel this is a valuable step for ebBP, the health care domain and METU
as well as other domains and user communities. Thanks METU for a job
well done. We look forward to seeing more of the CPP and CPA editors.
Happy New Year and again we commend your work thus far and encourage
your continued interest in ebBP.
[1] You can do so to myself (monica.martin@sun.com) and/or Dale Moberg
(dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com) directly as likely the list will reject a
posting as you are not TC members or observers.
[2] v2.0.1 Public Review Draft, r03 found at:
Schema
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16061&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Schema Documentation
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16063&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
SignalSchema
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16062&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
SignalSchema Documentation
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16064&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Spec (pdf)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16060&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Spec (doc)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16058&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Includes technical specification and appendices.
Spec (htm)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16066&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Spec (diff doc)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16059&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Includes technical specification and appendices.
Spec Appendices (htm)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16067&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
Supplements (transforms and comment list)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=16065&wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
[end]
[3] Business Transaction and Commercial Transaction are of the
BusinessTransactionType and are typically for intentional exchange.
[4] In the future, these templates and a profile could be parsable in
XML (IIC and our team starting to work on this).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]