Re: [regrep] V3.0 of ebXML for SOA

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

David:

Great - so we can count on your input to the group then?? (If and when 
approved)

Duane

David RR Webber wrote:

> Duane raised some interesting points that I'd like to
> focus on - in regard to - creating a new 3.0 release of
> ebXML.
>  
> My biggest departure point is around the single
> issue of a perscribed architecture as opposed to
> a suggested architecture.
>  
> I believe that trying to force certain technology
> components down peoples throats as "you must
> have this to be ebXML compliant" is a serious
> mistake - and especially in the area of payloads.
>  
> One of the reasons payloads were never perscribed
> is exactly that.
>  
> The great strength of ebXML is that you can eat just
> the pieces you need.
>  
> Next up - Registry and CAM components offer a
> phased approach - that is based on sound business ROI
> to discreet problems - around information alignment and
> interoperablity.
>  
> Now - if people discover they really can save money and
> work more efficiently by using your technology - you will
> not have to force them to use it - they will come to it
> themselves - and that's essential longterm.
>  
> So - again - its comes back to - articulating where those
> ROI factors are - from a business-centric view - and that
> is what we need to spend our effort on IMHO.
>  
> As for the SOA fit - yes - we do need to make sure that
> SOA literature includes ebXML components as options
> there - and so again - the value proposition needs to be
> made at that level.   But its not a case anymore from
> the technology level of saying "you must have this to
> have an SOA" - as UDDI found out - that dog does not
> hunt.
>  
> Identify the business needs in a replicatable and formal
> way - and the technology to accomplish that will then
> make sense for people.  Again the OASIS BCM TC is
> focused there.
>  
> The platform for "ebXML Architecture" may actually be
> a losing proposition - and instead just perpetuates the
> notion of SOA v ebXML - whereas if the effort is
>  
>   "ebXML V3.0 for SOA" 
>  
> I think you have a much much stronger message that
> all the TCs can signup to - to make sure their piece
> of the pie makes ebXML for SOA a compelling
> business success.
>  
> Cheers, DW.


-- 
Senior Standards Strategist
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://www.adobe.com