Re: PIP IDs

[Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>]

Marty:

 

My understanding is that RosettaNet is in the process of using ebXML BPSS to repackage existing PIPs into more machine processable packages, as well as to describe more complex collaboration scenarios. (Existing PIP specifications consist of machine-processable DTDs and Word document descriptions plus message guidelines that are primarily intended for human consumption. These are being replaced with XSDs, BPSS process specifications, and constraints described using OCL.)

 

Existing PIPs (which consist of request-response actions or just notification actions) correspond to ebXML binary collaborations each of which comprises a single business transaction activity. The business transaction activity would be defined in terms of a business transaction that either has both a requesting activity and a responding activity, or just a requesting activity. The messages exchanged within a PIP instance (either two action messages plus two acknowledgement messages, or one action message plus one acknowledgement message) would constitute one conversation. In fact, in both the 1.1 and 2.0 versions of the RosettaNet Implementation Framework, there is no mechanism in the Service Header to tie together multiple related PIP instances (e.g., Create Purchase Order, Change Purchase Order, Cancel Purchase Order) into the same conversation. The correlation will have to be achieved through elements in the message payload (Service Content in RosettaNet parlance).

 

Moving forward, for newly developed PIPs that make use of existing PIPs as building blocks, I think it will definitely be useful to have a conversation ID that tie together the execution of related PIP instances.

 

Regards

-Arvola

 

Arvola Chan (arvola@tibco.com)
TIBCO Software (on loan to RosettaNet)
+1-650-846-5046 (US-Pacific)

----- Original Message -----

From: "Martin W Sachs" <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>

To: "Arvola Chan" <arvola@tibco.com>

Cc: "David Fischer" <david@drummondgroup.com>; "Burdett David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>; "ebXML Msg" <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Pete Wenzel" <Pete.Wenzel@RosettaNet.org>; <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>

Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:03 PM

Subject: Re: PIP IDs

Arvola,

Thanks for the clarification.  As you are probably 
aware, there are other
response routing issues that have surfaced lately to 
the CPPA team, so this
topic will be on the CPPA agenda as well.  This 
is an area where the MSG
and CPPA teams will have to work together.

I 
have been assuming that for RosettaNet, a conversation equals one
execution 
of one PIP.  I believe that your note says that a single unit 
of
business in RosettaNet can involve several PIPs. What is your view of 
the
relationship of a PIP to a coversation.  Is each PIP a 
separate
conversation or should execution of all the related PIPs in a unit 
of
business be treated as a single conversation? Since the 
conversation
boundaries are determined by the application, this is really 
your call for
RosettaNet but I am interested in your 
thinking.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin 
W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 
10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  
Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ 
us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************



Arvola 
Chan <arvola@tibco.com> on 07/19/2001 
12:03:32 PM

To:   Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, David 
Fischer
      <david@drummondgroup.com>
cc:   Burdett David <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, 
ebXML Msg
      <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>, 
Pete Wenzel
      <Pete.Wenzel@RosettaNet.org>
Subject:  Re: PIP IDs




Marty,

Up to 
now, RosettaNet PIPs are either  request-response (two-actions) 
or
notification (one-action) style business  processes. Earlier versions 
of
PIP 3A4 are an exception in the sense  that PIP 3A4 covers Create 
Purchase
Order (request-response), Change  Purchase Order 
(request-response) and
Cancel Purchase Order (request-response)  
interactions. Recently, PIP 3A4
has been split into 3A4 (Create Purchase 
Order),  3A8 (Change Purchase
Order), and 3A9 (Cancel Purchase Order) in 
order to achieve  some degree of
uniformity across PIPs (I believe). 
Therefore, I think it is  reasonable to
equate existing RosettaNet PIPs 
with BPSS Business  Transactions.

In the RosettaNet message header, 
there are  separate elements to identify
the PIP ID, the PIP action and 
the Service.  Multiple PIPs may be
implemented by the same service, 
e.g., there may be a Buyer  service
implementing PIPs 3A4, 3A8, 3A9 from 
the buyer perspective, and a Seller
service implementing the same PIPs from 
the seller perspective.

I don't think we should equate PIP ID with 
Service  and action with "the
particular business transaction within the 
PIP". Otherwise,  we will not be
able to capture the role information, 
e.g., the ability to  distinguish a
Buyer Service from a Seller Service, 
and a request action from a  response
action.

From the RosettaNet 
point of view, it will be  desirable if we can have
distinct Service, 
PIP (equivalently BPSS Business  Transaction), and action
elements in 
the message header. Alternatively, we can  use the Service
element to 
capture role information (e.g., Buyer vs Seller), and  use the
Action 
element to capture the PIP ID. Whether we are dealing with a
request action 
or a response action will have to be inferred from the
Service  
element.

Regards,
-Arvola

Arvola Chan (arvola@tibco.com)
TIBCO Software 
(on loan to RosettaNet)
+1-650-846-5046 (US-Pacific)

----- Original 
Message -----
From: "Martin W Sachs" <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>
To: "David 
Fischer" <david@drummondgroup.com>
Cc: 
"Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>;  "ebXML Msg" <
ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: PIP 
IDs



In my opinion it makes more sense for Service to point to the 
PIP ID  and
action to point to the particular business transaction 
within the PIP.  In
other words one execution of a PIP is a 
conversation. I believe that  some
of the PIPs include multiple 
business  
transactions.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin  
W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, 
NY  10598
914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:   
Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address: mwsachs @  
us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************



David  
Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> on  
07/19/2001 10:45:54 AM

To: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
cc: ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: PIP IDs




David, in the F2F you  
mentioned the need for a new element to contain
industry specific 
business  process identifiers such as a RosettaNet PIP
identifier. Could 
this be done  with Service/Action where the Service would
be something 
like RNet and the  Action something like PIP3A1  
(Request
Quote)?

<eb:Service>urn:services:RNet</eb:Service>
<eb:Action>PIP3A1</eb:Action>

Regards,

David  
Fischer
Drummond  
Group.




------------------------------------------------------------------
To  
unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single 
word
"unsubscribe"  in the body to: ebxml-msg-request@lists.oasis-open.org




------------------------------------------------------------------
To 
unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" 
in the body to: ebxml-msg-request@lists.oasis-open.org