[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: meeting agenda, + previous minutes
Agenda for Nov 14 / 1-512-225-3050 / 375491 11am PT: 1. Update on plans for upgrade of test framework (scripting,
driver) (to address KorBIT feedback, NIST semantic testing, and choreography
support) 2. ebBP deployment profile template: try to get an outline. 3. Other? Jacques |
Time: Monday October 31st, 2005, 11am PT Host: Fujitsu Toll only : 1-512-225-3050 Attendees : October 31: Monica Martin (Sun) Jacques Durand (Fujitsu) Pete Wenzel (Sun) Sacha Schlegel (CycloneCommerce ) Agenda: 1. Final CPPA Deployment Template WD. vote it a CD. 2. Profiling ebBP - where to start from. ------- Action Items: Monica: will check the worksheet for collaboration busines process (UN/CEFACT) Jacques: publish and announce the CPPA deployment profile template. ------- Minutes: 1- Final CPPA Deployment Template WD: - Version 0.8 is voted as a CD - no objection. - Pete to finalize OASIS editorial compliance. - Jacques to publish it. 2- Profiling ebBP: what is in a deployment profile? - ebBP will require conformance testing. It is expected that tools (design time) will enable both conforming Bus Transactions, and schema conformance. - Users may have their own BT formats, or use atomic BTs that can be composed by communities either as new BTs or Bus Collaborations. (e.g. UBL: use special additional process steps.) - a generic def can be specialized /extended. - profile template: a set of BT templates? e.g. in table format? yes. - Sacha> worksheets are available for collaboration busines process analysts. could be reused as a starting point. Monica will check. - BCs : even if in implementation phase, may be target of profiling. - the referencig of bus docs also needs be part of a profile. - logical bus docs: UBL compiles Bus Docs from different locations. - condition expressions in ebBP: must be able to attach business semantics to these. - Sacha> ebBP users need to know how to create an instance, etc. Then, how do they share these defs with their partners. - Sacha> 2 steps to deploy ebBP: (1) some have to create thse defs, (2) how to share them with partners. A def may be syntactically correct, but not valid w/r/ conventions. - sharing = parties define expetations about: security, timing (run-time? static?) - To look at: Use cases from Monica. - to differentiate: multi-party from binary. - Monica> UN/CEFACT debated if multi-party can be broken down into binary collabs. - For example, a Buyer party may not be visible to a 3rd party involved in a multiparty transaction (e.g. case where a broker acts as proxy for a buyer). So some interactions may have to rmain hidden to some. So visibility, although it is critical, has never been worked out in UMM.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]