Re: [ebxml-bp] eBusiness Metamodel EARLY DRAFT 0.03

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Duane,

Phew - yuk!

I'd like to propose we start with a business-centric view first.

I'm not sure any of this implementation layer makes any sense
at all any more.  Having lived this for five years - this 
UML diagram has an other-worldly old-story feel to it.

But I know you like it so that's OK - its a technologist
eye view on the relationships!

I believe we need to understand how the big picture 
collaboration happens between components - to 
serve the SOA goals - and be able to deliver that
for people too.

One things we've learned via BPSS work is handling 
signals and events is critical - and I'm not sure that 
aspect is "in there" in the UML - or even if UML can
do that well - from some of the comments on the BPSS
list.  I like especially JJ's post about the third wave of
software - that is message oriented (hence pi-calculus) -
and how the SOA needs to support that - and tools
like Microsoft XAML....yet provide a business 
perspective.

Alot of what you've put in may just not be applicable / or
even work - for a given implementation - and its 
impossible to decouple for people the way you have
it drawn.  I much prefer something like the Lubash
Pyramid - that shows the hierarchy without committing
to strict dependances.  The world is more sophisticated -
and handling PDAs and more in the picture - requires
more flexible architecture thinking - or at least something
people can grok conceptually - and be able to visually
relate to their project deployment model...

This time around I'd personally prefer to see more of
the business vision driving the technology implementation - 
whereas before the OO / UMM / UML driver seemed
to tilt things too that technology side.

But you are right - it does provoke discussion!!!

DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com>
To: <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>
Cc: "ebXML BP" <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 6:25 PM
Subject: [ebxml-bp] eBusiness Metamodel EARLY DRAFT 0.03


> If 1.0 is a release, ready for public draft, please consider this a 0.03.
> 
> The purpose is to capture the state of ebXML, WS, CEFACT and 
> requirements of business.  The concepts on this can be mapped back to 
> the ebXML Requirements document.
> 
> We may not have time to discuss this in NO but it is interesting to view.
> 
> Please note that the names of certain items do not necessarily 
> correspond to the names of the work governing them.  For example, the 
> OASIS CAM work MAY be potentially used as the way to constrain Business 
> Payload Metadata. I do not make any implied warranties as to such being 
> true or false.
> 
> There are also several departures from existing ebXML groups.  The 
> details for "TimeToPerform" have been  subclassed to a class of their 
> own since they are used by the BusinessCollaboration, CPP, CPA and 
> BusinessProcess classes.  I have added two attributes for value and 
> qualifier (units of measure).  This is to cater to both short and long 
> running business processes/collaborations.  We cannot always assume it 
> would be expressed in days (not precise enough for some) or seconds (the 
> instance values may become unmanageable if you have something that runs 
> 7 years (220,752,000 seconds).
> 
> As per Dale's message, we may have already identified some unnecessary 
> containership.
> 
> Comments, flames, suggestions, etc may be directed at me in person in 
> new orleans.
> 
> Duane Nickull
> 
> -- 
> Senior Standards Strategist
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://www.adobe.com
> 
>