ebBP 5/15/2005A: Response Pattern (Novelli)

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

Everyone,
As we discussed on Tuesday's call, here is part of the interchange with 
Cristian Novelli regarding a response only pattern.

Question summary:

    * Response documents only are used.
    * ebBP, CPA, CPP may be used.
    * Whether a request takes place:
          o Manual request
          o No request  (status order and quantity of defects)

Discussion 10 May 2005 (or email suggestions):

    * In examples provided, the request may be manual or implicit.
    * If request is manual or implicit, options include:
          o Use Commercial Transaction recognizing that a trigger has to
            indicate when the request occurs.
          o Use Data Exchange and only model in a process the response.
          o Use Notification. An out of band trigger specifies the
            implicit response. A formal response occurs. [1]

I'd like explicit feedback from the team before making any additional 
descriptive changes for the v2.0.1 draft. The Data Exchange actually 
allows Novelli
to specify their own criteria and intent.  Should the other options be 
considered, these may necessitate specification changes.

Comments welcome this week if at all possible. Thanks to Cristiano for 
the comments. Regards.

[1] Note: The v2.0 takes the indications from historical guidance, 
specifying Notification = Notification of Failure.



>>>> Novelli2: Dear Monica,
>>>> I have a problem in the implementation of our collaboration framework.
>>>>
>>>> Some enterprises follow an incremental approach to the adoption of 
>>>> the framework. They wish to use only a part of the set of business 
>>>> documents,
>>>> so it may happen that they use response documents instead of the 
>>>> pair request-response.
>>>>
>>>> We want to allow them to declare clearly their choices by means of 
>>>> BPSS, CPP, CPA.
>>>
>>> mm1: There are patterns (within concrete set) that do not require 
>>> both a request and response (reference: Information Distribution is 
>>> only a
>>> request).
>>
> Novelli: I would prefer to use, anyway, the pattern "Commercial 
> Transaction" instead of "Information Distribution" (Commercial 
> Transaction is a formal
> obligation, Information Distribution does not).  Do you think that I can?
>
>>> mm1: In addition, the v2.0 allows you to define your own data 
>>> exchange pattern, with semantics and business documents. You could 
>>> therefore define a
>>> response only.  However, I have other questions:
>>>
>>>    * What is the party responding to if there is no request (is it a 
>>> manual, web based or other request)?
>>
> Novelli: two situations are possible:
> 1) manual request via telephone, fax, etc.
> 2) Some times, simply, the request there is not:
> i.e. StatusOrder can be sended without a explicit request, 
> periodically or the same is about 'map of defects' (quality 
> certificate and related discounts that corresponds to the quantity of 
> defects)
>
> Our aim is to manage the process description with a structure that is 
> as much as possible simple and easy to be managed by the enterprises 
> so we
> prefer to have few atomic that must be referred by the CPP and CPA: we 
> need to allow the firms to publish their intention to use each single
> document without forcing them to adopt predefined couples 
> request-response.
>
> Our trouble is that our approach could be considered, anyway, 
> compliant with ebBP, CPPA specs.