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.
[RBN] Don’t quite understand what you mean by
feedback. The business concepts are in affect the definition of a mapping from
a business construct to PCLS entities. This mapping is expressed via templates.
The templates are defined within a capability as they are expressing how to use
a subset of the information model of a capability.
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...)
[RBN] I’m not sure that I agree. Take a look at the manufacturers_item
example. I think that it is important that a business concept is defined
by templates that are within the capabilities. The reason being is that as far
as possible we want to have a consistent interpretation of the PLCS model. That
is why we have capabilities and templates.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Bodington
[mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
Sent: 31 August 2005 12:35
To: 'Tim Turner';
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: 'Martin Gibson'; 'Phil
Rutland'
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Business
concepts
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