OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebsoa message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [ebsoa] front page


Wow there buddy!

Let's not get this confused about this - you state:
> And these are just 2 examples of several. Given the public support for
> such a path, what are the reasons that it has been abandoned? And do we
> anticipate such work ever being done in another forum?

Nothing could be further from the truth.

If I had to say anything on this - it would be that the WS* 'crew' have
this public request as an endorsement of the 'kill ebXML and just absorb any
bits worth salvaging".  See the their PPT submissions to the AIAG task
force on Alignment of ebXML and Webservices.

Now - compare that to the response from the ebXML camp.  We have
actively sought to accommodate WSDL-based exchanges (despite the
fact that WSDL was never designed or intended for eBusiness) - in
both BPSS and ebMS.  And we've made a pretty good job of showing
how WSDL can be used with both these to implement somewhat
useful and business-relevant solutions.

Fortunately Volkswagen and GM both understand the bread-and-butter of
eBusiness and are forging ahead with ebXML as a foundation technology.

I think people have also come to realize that there are fundamental
differences of approach here - between building deterministic business
process definitions that can be shared across industry domains using
open semantic vocabularies and context driven transactions - that
exploit the best of ebXML in tandem with WS* - and building
ad hoc loosely coupled non-deterministic transient WS* exchanges for
internal and some external business system integration exchanges
using local custom interface definitions.

That is why I've not bought into Duane's original suggest of changing
the charter for ebSOA.  To me - its always been about taking the
start point that ebXML 1.04 provides and updating that to leverage
WS* - but absolutely *not* about throwing out the baby with the
bath water.

I've have simply not had time to propose better wording around
this - since other priorities - such as BPSS V2.0 roll-out - and
jCAM integration with Hermes are currently top priorities.

I have however managed to work on a paper which I believe
gives perspective to the needs here :


Cheers, DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
To: <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: [ebsoa] front page

> All,
> I'm seeking opinions regarding the shift from bringing ebXML TA 1.04
> forward as stated below to the new purpose, only because I am giving a
> presentation on SOA to a major U.S. federal agency next month at which
> this question may be brought up. I have also received some "ad hoc"
> inquiries in various forums.
> I should state up front that I am not in any way questioning the
> decision that was made regarding the shift in focus of this TC (I think
> it's a good shift), but rather I am seeking information as to what the
> challenges of the original focus were (or may have been if the focus
> were continued as such).
> More context:
> There have been some mentions in the press over this past year regarding
> how an effort such as the one originally proposed - for example, David
> Linthicum's ebizq.net article of April[1], and the January NetFusion
> article regarding the DoD EMALL's adoption of ebMS, in which (on p.2) it
> states "Ongoing efforts to merge ebXML and Web services efforts might
> help spur adoption in the U.S., analysts say.".
> And these are just 2 examples of several. Given the public support for
> such a path, what are the reasons that it has been abandoned? And do we
> anticipate such work ever being done in another forum?
> If you would like to reply, please do so online. Offline replies make me
> wonder whether or not I should mention what was told to me in public. :)
> Thanks so much,
> Joe
> [1] http://www.ebizq.net/hot_topics/soa/features/4323.html
> "(ebXML's Move To SOA: Clearly A Good One")
> [2] http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0126dod.html?page=1
> ("'Next EDI' gains key proponent")
> Duane Nickull wrote:
> >
> > Team:
> >
> > Our front page states:
> >
> > " The purpose of the TC is to continue work on the ebXML Technical
> > Architecture to bring it from v1.04 to a more current architecture that
> > takes into account both subsequent releases of the ebXML specifications
> > and other Web Services and service-oriented architecture works."
> >
> > I would like us to consider rewording it to be more reflective of our
> > charter and our work.  IMO - the sentence above does NOT accurately
> > capture the work we are doing.
> >
> > "The purpose of the TC is to develop an eBusiness Service Oriented
> > Architecture (eb SOA) that takes into account Web Service standards,
> > ebXML and other service-oriented architecture works.  The eb SOA
> > specification will be expressed as a combination of a normative
> > specification and a catalog of architectural patterns.  The intent is to
> > capture the patterns of SOA specific to the requirements of global
> > electronic business."
> >
> > I do not believe the second statement requires that we reword our
> > charter and is in fact more accurate to what our charter and mandates
> >
> > I would like to propose a discussion of this during our next conference
> > call Wednesday September 22, followed possibly by a vote.
> >
> > Duane
> >
> > --
> > Senior Standards Strategist
> > Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > http://www.adobe.com
> -- 
> Kind Regards,
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz Allen Hamilton

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]