Re: [egov] 2/26/2004: OASIS e-GOV TC : WORKFLOW STANDARD Comments

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

Adding to Monica's excellent comments:

We should also consider the inter-enterprise aspects of BPA/M, as
supported by technologies such as Enterprise Information Integration
(EII) - which enables a series of data sources (which can span
enterprises) to be treated as a single, virtual data source - and
service-oriented architectures (SOAs) which enable the consolidation and
sharing of services by multiple "service consumers". Emerging Web
Services security standards will make this vision even more of a reality
as time goes on.

Kind Regards,
Joe

"Monica J. Martin" wrote:
> 
> Everyone,
> First we need to differentiate business process automation/mangement
> from workflow in our scope and the basis for our evaluation. Workflow
> typically involves a human-in-the-loop. As of late, we seem to infer
> with the increase in interest and technology development in this area
> that the lines between workflow and business process are graying.
> However, the question still stands here and therefore I'll call this
> area of interest 'thingy' until we come to consensus. The definitions on
> pg 5 are good but we mix these concepts in how we describe them and we
> should bound our area of interest.
> 
> Next here are some core questions related to our boundaries and scope of
> an proposed recommendations for 'thingy' standards:
> 
>     * Important 'thingy' capabilities include:
> 
>        1. Business process management related
>               * Choreography
>               * Control flow
>               * State alignment
>               * Business semantics
>        2. Workflow related:
>               * Work list maintenance
>               * Delegation
>               * User interface
>        3. General:
>               * Governance and approval process
> 
>     * Important 'thingy' criteria include:
>          1. Portability
>          2. Interoperability
>          3. Core functional capabilities such as error or exception
>             handling (given where you fall in talking about the
>             'thingy'), activity composition, correlation and
>             conversation, etc.
>     * General comments:
>           o Historically workflow has been an enterprise exercise. But
>             today, the lines and definition of enterprise 'depends.'
>             Saying internal and external doesn't help much either
>             because we have become widely distributed and extended
>             enterprises by design. Suggest you consider 'within or
>             across domains of control.'
>           o No longer is workflow or business process limited to an 'IT
>             system.'
>           o The diagram from WfMC you provided still needs further
>             review. It was provided and feedback sought when I attended
>             another TC meeting in December 2003. There were several
>             changes/corrections suggested. We can decide if we review
>             and comment back to WfMC or make changes for our own goals.
>             Either way, this diagram requires re-evaluation. There is a
>             difference here between process and business process, subtle
>             but immensely important.
>           o We can more effectively evaluate the recommendation after we
>             clearly understand what 'thingy' of which we speak. The
>             diagram mixes these concepts which are interrelated, which
>             could lead to confusion.
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.