Hi
Rob,
No
problem, but since we're talking about 'architecture' etc., I would like to
raise a question about templates which has been at the back of my mind
recently.
Is it
possible that different templates (maybe similar, but refined), would be
developed by & for business specific purposes? I raise this question because
it seems like a possible scenario, given that we have been developing
templates for the generic (or widest accepted) usage. Just as with the reference
data - we started off just with the most generic stuff required to support a
capability, but now we have bus. specific ref.data. If bus. specific concerns
can generate new/refined templates, then acc. to fig1, this would probably
require a new capability.
If
your current fig1 below is correct, then this would somehow feedback to the
capabilities in general & the exsting templates. However, if somehow the
templates were managed separately from the capability, then different templates
could be 'plugged-in' to support the different bus.concepts & ref.data. This
might then reduce the number of escalating capabilities required and even
consolidate some where there is already considerable overlap. If the Dexs had
the ability to act as a configuration mechanism (as they do now for
capabilities) they might also specify which templates
(assuming several valid for each cap) are to be usedwithin a data
exchange contract.
Irrespectively of this waffle, I would suggest that your fig might use
the term DEC (Data Exchange Contract) rather than overload
DEX.
Also,
I'd perhaps suggest that a business concept is not defined_by a
capability. The business concept can be exchanged 'in the context of' a
specified capability. It is actually the bus.concept which defines the context
(through the ref data and mapping) in which the capability is used. (I think
this is what led me to thinking about templates specific for a
particular type of bus.concept...)
regards,
Tim
Hi
I confess - I was a
bit hasty in sending out the diagram.
I meant to explain
that we previously talked about "Data exchange contracts" but never really
defined them beyond:
Identify the DEX and its
version
Identify the relevant
conformance class (documented in the DEX)
Identify business
concepts (which again refer to business specific sets of reference data)
Reference data library /
ref data sources
Bounding scope of
reference data
Data representation
rules and constraints (for data validation)
Explanation of how that
information is represented is defined in the capabilities
Once I looked into
this I felt that it was really a dex defined using business concepts. Hence
the suggestion that it should be referred to as a "Business DEX". What else
would go into an exchange contract (apart from the legal / service /
availability / liability aspects) and do we want to provide that in
DEXlib?
I agree with you Tim,
that a Business DEX should use the same XML as a PLCS DEX.
However, a PLCS DEX
refers to the PLCS activity model. A Business DEX, might
not.
I need to look into
the impact of using the DEX XML to represent Business DEXs.
In the meantime, here
is an updated diagram reflecting the comments so far.
BTW - so far nobody
has said they preferred the original diagram, so I will make the change in the
help files (we can modify this as a result of any further
discussion)
-----Original
Message----- From:
Tim Turner [mailto:tjt@lsc.co.uk]
Sent: 31 August 2005
16:41 To:
'rob.bodington@eurostep.com'; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: 'Martin Gibson'; 'Phil
Rutland' Subject: RE:
[plcs-dex] Business concepts
I had not heard of
business dex before. However, in our context I can see it might be
useful.
However, I don't know
that a Dex is defined by business concepts (fig2). I'd suggest that they use
business concepts. Also, I'd presume that they may be based upon a PLCS Dex.
In fact, both should be based upon the PLCS Dex
template.
How will Dexlib
differentiate between these two types of
Dexs though?
-----Original
Message----- From: Rob
Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] Sent: 31 August 2005 08:46 To:
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: 'Martin Gibson'; 'Phil
Rutland' Subject: RE:
[plcs-dex] Business concepts
Hi
In the proposed
diagram, I should probably include Templates in a capability.
Also, The Business
DEXs that are arguably the same as a Data exchange agreement- though a data
exchange agreement may well have additional legal
information.
There perhaps
should also be a relationship between a "Business DEX" to a "PLCS DEX"
indicating that the Business DEX conforms to the PLCS DEX.
-----Original
Message----- From: Rob
Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] Sent: 31 August 2005 13:21 To:
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: 'Martin Gibson'; 'Phil
Rutland' Subject: RE:
[plcs-dex] Business concepts
Hi
I have also
attempted to refine the diagram that shows the relationship between the
DEXS, business concept, ref data etc.
If everyone agrees,
I would like to replace the following figure in Introduction with the
diagram below
-----Original
Message----- From: Rob
Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] Sent: 31 August 2005 12:01 To:
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: Martin Gibson; Phil
Rutland Subject: [plcs-dex]
Business concepts
Hi
I have now completed the changes
to the business concepts.
Basically, a business concept
must be defined within a context.
This has meant a fair amount of
change to DEXlib XSL. If you find that anything does not work, please tell
me.
Details on how to create a
business concept are provided in the "Developing a Business
concept" help pages. This also explains the new business concept directory
structure. If this does not make sense, then let me know, or propose some
changes.
I have also provided a
section in the "Introduction" help pages that describes business concepts.
Whilst I was at it, I "improved" the section
describing reference data. See what you think.
If anyone has been developing
business concepts, please contact me about migrating the old business
concepts to the new.
I have deleted the existing
business concept directories:
dexlib/data/busconcept/allowance_parts_list
dexlib/data/busconcept/bc_template
dexlib/data/busconcept/identify_a_part_and_its_constituent_parts
dexlib/data/busconcept/manufacturers_item
Let me know if these should e
retained.
I have created one example
context TLSS and defined a single business concept within it:
"manufacturers_item"
Regards Rob
------------------------------------------- Rob
Bodington Eurostep Limited Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com
http://www.share-a-space.com Email:
Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com Phone: +44 (0)1454
270030 Mobile: +44
(0)7796 176 401
DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY
MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by
anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error.
This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No
2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1
4SG
DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG
|