12/7/2003: [Fwd: "Late Binding" of TimeToPerform]

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Lars, after reviewing the slides, the note and thinking about the 
learning session and teleconference discussions, there are several items 
that we should perhaps address, and talk about in the context of BPSS:

    * Late binding on the BPSS
          o Specifying the timeToPerform to the greatest time possible
            in the context of this type of collaboration [1]
                + Allowing late binding to accommodate logical business
                  document requirements
                + Specifying when the late binding may occ
    * Potential to override BPSS attributes in the CPP/A between the
      parties [2] [3]
    * Breaking the response into multiple responses: where more timing
      applies to specific requirements (such as delivery)
          o ur either from the perspective of the requestor or the
            responder [4]

I encourage the team to think about these items in the context of 
roles/partners, timeToPerform, and the dynamic aspects of late binding 
we discussed last week. [5]

[1] May likely not be as tight you would like given the interactions 
defined by internal systems to support. Which brings up an interesting 
point on
being able to keep these systems loosely coupled. For example, we have 
one case where the order may go by alternate means and not logged in the 
B2B system, and this really complicates this company's processing. We 
have to account for that at the process level.
[1] Determine if this could meet your needs: See Section 9 of CPP/A 
document.
[3] May complement any late binding functionality if adopted.
[4] This may be driven either by business or service level agreements, 
or on a case by case basis. For the latter, I would think we will have 
to discuss
the per-instance impact and its appropriateness.
[5] Related Work Items 23, 25, 28, 46 and 55.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	"Late Binding" of TimeToPerform
Date: 	Wed, 03 Dec 2003 03:21:23 +0100
From: 	Lars.Abrell@teliasonera.com
To: 	Monica.Martin@Sun.COM



Monica,
During our use of BPSS we have in different situations noticed a need for different values in the TimeToPerform attribute for the same Binary Collaboration. This specific use case is based on the BC:NegotiateOrder in the NeBI specification (www.nebi.biz). Please see the attached slides. This very simple use case for ordering different "Field Service Products" in the telecom industry is based on using only the BTA:OrderRequestByBuyer and the BTA:OrderAcknowledgmentBySupplier in the BC:NegotiateOrder. This simple version of the BC:NegotiateOrder is used for ordering different products using the same generic BusinessDocument (BD:Order). In the product specific part of this BD:Order (i.e, in the order rows) the different "Field Service Products" are specified. Depending on the different "Field Service Products" (or combinations of  "Field Service Products") in a BD:Order or different "time to delivery" of the specified product, there is a need also to have different values in the TimeToPerform attribute of the BC:NegotiateOrder. 

Feel free to use this in any way you think is appropriate 

 <<TimeToPerform.ppt>> 
Regards //Lars
Lars Abrell, TeliaSonera

TimeToPerform.ppt