[ebxml-cppa-negot] Re: ebxml-cppa-negot: BPSS Status Report

["Himagiri(Hima) Mukkamala" <himagiri@sybase.com>]

Marty,

This discussion may not be relevant for this mailing list, but Business process
engines implementing BPSS have to do state tracking as BPSS
exists right now. Enterprises using BPSS compliant software
change states based on interactions - these intereactions include
receiving a request document, receiving a response.
Hence this intereactions create specific points at which
state change happens.

Coming back to negotiation, if we look at the BPSS and CPA
which I sent out earlier that were created using BPSS as it
stands today, we can figure out if that doesn't capture
negotiation business process in its entirety.

-hima
 

Martin W Sachs wrote:

 

Brian,

Fine. Let's see how far we can go with what we have.

State tracking is a basic middleware function that applications should not be required to perform for themselves. I encourage you to drive the BPSS team toward defining the modeling for it.

Regards,
Marty
 

*************************************************************************************
Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************
"Brian S. Hayes" <brian.hayes@UCLAlumni.net>
 
 

"Brian S. Hayes" <brian.hayes@UCLAlumni.net> 07/10/2002 11:39 AM Please respond to brian.hayes

To: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "'Himagiri 'Hima' Mukkamala'" <himagiri@sybase.com> cc:  Subject: ebxml-cppa-negot: BPSS Status Report

Marty,
The recommended changes to support the simple negotiation
collaboration/process model were not accepted by the BPSS team for the
reason that the nature of the changes was decided to be out of scope for
this BPSS release. The changes would require that the software (e.g.
BSIs) maintain state. The notes for this decision (Item #4) are at
http://lists.ebtwg.org/archives/ebtwg-bps/200207/msg00014.html

I believe Hima agreed to look into alternative ways to achieve the
negotiation process model that may involve the CPPA.

If acceptable alternatives cannot be found I believe we can proceed as
itemized below. Keep in mind that I believe that a proper simple
negotiation model requires two things: the authorized roles are
identical for both parties and that the BSIs or other application level
software be able to understand who's turn it is to initiate the next
counter-proposal.

Plan:
1. We create the process model and BPSS instance that is as close to the
ideal model as possible. It may need to be annoted to with statements
like "take turns with counter-proposals". At this time CPA Negotiation
application software will need to enforce this business process rule.
2. The BPSS project team and other appropriate eBTWG project teams write
a white paper or, preferably, a technical report that specifies the
changes to the BPSS and BSI to support the recommend changes. The white
paper/technical report would then serve as a basis for BPPS 2.x or 3.0.

Best regards,
Brian Hayes