[ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-cppa-negot] RE: BSI distinguishingsuccess,failure,and transition conditions

[bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

From: Jean-Jacques Dubray
> Clearly BPSS is a bit more abstract than let's say the ebXML MSH. I
> often get the question: why is BPSS useful: at design time? at
runtime?,
> why do you need runtime component to support BPSS? -as it is part of
the
> CPA-
>
> I never get the question why do we need a piece of software to
implement
> MSH?

I really think that reflects the state of understanding
and implementation.  (Or buzzwords?)

I can remember a year ago when most people in ebXML
didn't think they needed business transactions, let alone
business collaborations or business processes.

They thought it was enough to do EDI in XML - that is,
just send messages with a new payload format.

Judging from the discussions on the W3C mailing lists
and elsewhere, this may be the time when "business
process" and variant terms like "choreography" and
"orchestration" and "transaction" achieve buzzword
status.

-Bob Haugen