RE: [ubl-dev] Re: [ebxml-dev] P2P for e-business - applications?

[stephen.green@systml.co.uk]

Hi Guys

So it looks like it is still on the horizon, albeit
with some vendor reluctance, then.

I could imagine it being very useful for situations
where there is collaboration needed: you mention the
problem there is in parties agreeing business processes
and I'd add to it agreement of the constituent parts
of a document (customisation as UBL calls it). Maybe
products will one day use IM or the like to provide
collaboration; like chat but more structured and
controlled, point-to-point, clerk-to-clerk as it were.
This could result in configuration of both systems for
the subsequent B2B. It's not so far fetched when you
look at the negotiation of CPAs in ebXML.

So what's the point of point-to-point? :-) Not much
more than allowing collaboration in real time. In B2B
I'd regard that as imperative for trading agreements
but not necessarily for the business itself. But if
it is provided for agreement resolution then why not
allow it to be used subsequently for the business
itself.

But all this talk of expensive development just makes
me think there must be more value in doing it than you
guys say or you wouldn't be talking about it still :-)

All the best

Stephen Green



Quoting david.lyon@preisshare.net:

> Quoting Roger Bass <Roger@Traxian.com>:
>
>> Stephen, David et al,
>>
>> I'm jumping into this thread a little late...
>
> no - unfortunately it is still an ongoing thing...
>
>> This technology discussion all misses the point. From a pragmatic SMB's
>> perspective, all they care about in this context is interconnecting
>> their business processes with one or more of their trading partners -
>> and having that be easy and inexpensive enough to be worthwhile, in the
>> context of the overall business relationship. (The paper you link is
>> quite flawed in its most basic premises and approach, IMHO).
>
> Pretty much. I'd second that.
>
>> Don't get me wrong - I'd love to have a technology that could do at
>> least some connections P2P, and would do it for free.
>
> I think that there's a lot of talk and promises about this in the
> marketplace. But it usually comes down to it needing some (quite)
> expensive programming being done in an outsourced setting. It starts
> off with the promise of cheap... but ends up being more costly than the
> clients could have ever imagined because you end up having to provide
> on the job training for the programmers even though you are being
> charged full market rates.
>
> It's interesting to pick up the pieces anyhow.
>
>> In fact, I expect we will end up doing P2P in future - but only
>> once we have a big enough group of SMBs connected to have a stable set
>> of end-to-end process requirements. Then and only then will we (or
>> anyone else trying to do this) be able to deliver a P2P product that
>> actually works.
>>
>> There are no short cuts here.
>
> I think that's what a lot of us are trying to do. Sounds like a
> familiar soapbox anyway.
>
> Regards
>
> David
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org