Re: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-iic] Simple trading partner configurationfor ebMS

[Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>]

Anders,

If you can provide some details on your requirements, the CPPA team can
start discussing them. I have some specific comments/questions:

2. The spec is lacking support for pieces of information found in EDI
agreement.

MWS:  Please be specific about what additional EDI information is needed.

MWS: Please note that identifying the types of the EDI documents being
exchanged is in the BPSS domain, not the CPPA domain. The BPSS
SpecificationLocation attribute of the BusinessDocument element identifies
the document type. Its definition is "anyURI", so it is not limited to XML
documents.  It could point into an EDI repository of document definitions
or even directly name the EDI document number. CPPA and MSG are totally
agnostic to the type of business document.

3. Inflexibility, the spec is fairly rigid, lacking much needed
extensibility mechanisms.

MWS:  CPPA version 2 has extensibility elements in many places.  Please
identify the additional ones you need.

4. Lacking support for vital ebXML architectural elements.

MWS:  Please specify what ebXML architectural elements are missing.  The
CPPA, BPSS, and MSG teams have been working closely together since the
start of the original CPPA (TP) team in 2000.  What have we overlooked?

MWS:  I would also like to observe that the complexity issue can be dealt
with, in part, by a CPP/CPA composition tool whose GUI hides most of the
XML mechanics from the user and works at a functional level. It could hide
the details of putting together the correct set of interrelated elements
for each function. Such a tool could also be extended to composing and
using industry-specific profiles, as I have pointed out before.  If any
company has such a tool that is ready to sell, please start marketing it.
It is badly needed.

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


                                                                                                                            
                      "Anders W. Tell"                                                                                      
                      <anderst@toolsmit        To:       Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>                          
                      hs.se>                   cc:       Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com>, ebxml-iic@lists.oasis-     
                                                open.org, "Cppalist (E-mail)" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>             
                      08/29/2002 04:54         Subject:  Re: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-iic] Simple trading partner            
                      PM                        configuration for ebMS                                                      
                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                            



Hi,


Dale Moberg wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I skimmed the schema you provided. I guess it
> is one of the "70/30" optimization gambits.
> Anders from OpenEbXML has proposed a similar
> lightweight schema within the JSR 157 group.


Yes, we are working as set of ebXML TPA models, called Minimal TPA,
Extensible TPA and Business
Level Agreement (BLA). We are doing this in the context of our interest in
trade facilitation for
SME's and developing countries.

We consider the OASIS CPPA to have a number of flaws worth examining, apart
from the patent problem.

1. Complexity, its a large specification, assimple count reveals more that
80+ specifications
elements. This way to large for the average global SME.

2. The spec is lacking support for pieces of information found in EDI
agreement.

3. Inflexibility, the spec is fairly rigid, lacking much needed
extensibility mechanisms.

4. Lacking support for vital ebXML architectural elements.

A survey is being conducted regionally i Europe regading the use of EDI
agreements and early
analysis indicates two trends, 1. Most organisations find EDI agreement
useful 2. Almost all
organisations have exended origials agreements to fit their needs.

The second finding indicates that extensibility is of vital importance and
we feel that current
version of CPPA is not what is being asked for.

It is quite possible to adapt OAIS CPPA and create a concept of profiles
but still items 2-4 are not
solved. And adding new specification elements is not really a simplifying
activity.

I hope we in the Open ebXML Laboratory have time to finish of some papers
so I can bring it with me
to the UN/CEFACT meeting in sept.

/anders
--
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/  Anders W. Tell , Financial Toolsmiths AB             /
/ <anderst@toolsmiths.se>,<www.toolsmiths.se>           /
/ Open ebXML Laboratory: <www.openebxmllab.org>         /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/






----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>