[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [business-transaction] Tentative Hold Protocol?
Hi Karl, Tentative Hold Protocol was submitted as a note to W3C on 28 November by Intel. We've briefly examined and discussed it at Choreology -- the following observations are preliminary and very likely incorporate some level of misunderstanding or wrong assumptions. THP could be viewed as a sub-set of BTP functionality. It defines a combination of message formats and client and server side components and their behaviour, allowing business rules to be applied to the granting or refusing or cancellation or expiration of "holds" (expressions of interest in inventory). It is purely focused on SOAP/HTTP and, from a business perspective, angled towards procurement. BTP is more general, subsumes the THP behaviour, and is suitable for a wider range of applications and carrier protocols. A key difference between the two protocols is that BTP is a pure interoperation protocol, and makes no statements about how the implementation will be built or accessed, whereas THP combines an interop protocol with (in my view, unnecessary) statements about how the messages should be interpreted or dealt with by particular agents. THP also bundles application messages with THP headers within a SOAP body, causing a hardwire to a particular message format for the application. This makes it less suitable for wrapping or mapping down to existing application protocols than BTP. We in Choreology have recently been doing a lot of practical market research, in the form of conversations with potential end-users of our Cohesions product and explorations of numerous use cases in different verticals. One thing that has emerged over and again is that flexibility in terms of underlying carrier or application or trading protocol is a key requirement for cross-departmental or inter-org integration/trading, and investment protection. I find THP a very interesting and thought-provoking stab at part of the same problem as BTP. Yes, there is overlap, no there is not duplication. The Intel authors reference BTP and TIP as possible complements to THP. Alastair "Karl F. Best" wrote: > BTP'ers: > > I've recently heard about a Note that has been submitted to W3C called > Tentative Hold Protocol, which appears to overlap or duplicate the work > that the BTP TC is doing. Does anyone know anything about this Note, or > the work that it describes, and how it relates to BTP? Could you fill me > in? > > </karl> > ================================================================= > Karl F. Best > OASIS - Director, Technical Operations > 978.667.5115 x206 > karl.best@oasis-open.org http://www.oasis-open.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
begin:vcard n:Green;Alastair tel;cell:+44 795 841 2107 tel;fax:+44 207 670 1785 tel;work:+44 207 670 1780 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.choreology.com org:Choreology Ltd version:2.1 email;internet:alastair.green@choreology.com title:Managing Director adr;quoted-printable:;;13 Austin Friars=0D=0A;London;;EC2N 2JX; fn:Alastair Green end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC