OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel-uc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel-uc] Conf Call today at 4 PM ET / 1 PM PT


Harvey,
Per your question:
==============================================================================
Reed2: I don't understand your claim that I am disregarding pre-supply
chain activities. What we have is a proposed catalogue structure that allows
for the expression of both extra and intra enterprise use cases. In fact the
catalogue stresses not to forget intra-enterprise use cases. Please clarify.
==============================================================================
Example: Legal entities: Enterprise, Business Unit, Partner, Customer, Franchise.
I think we should add: System or Enterprise Unit (with a type to encourage inter-departmental or intra-logical enterprise operations) which is one level lower than Enterprise.  

On the legal entities, Harvey, the BPEL may not explicitly know the legal entity and we could create confusion by identifying the legal entities who are not the entities or participants involved in an interaction (Remember we have levels here so we need to be explicilty and directly clear about our definitions).

Thanks.

>>Reed1: Absolutely!
>>
>>In the current guidelines, there is a note under "minimum coverage" to 
>>remind us to have both intra and inter enterprise use cases.
>>
>>In the current catalogue, there is a table of actors that we need to 
>>fill out. The actors can be owned by any legal entity. So for 
>>instance, we can have say three actors within one business unit of a 
>>company. One of the actors could be a person, and the other two are 
>>systems, all wrapped in web services. One of our abstract use cases 
>>can then describe a process that only interacts with these three actors.
>>    
>>
>>mm2: I believe we also acknowledged that the legal mechanisms were 
>>almost certainly outside of our scope. Whether the actors are associated 
>>with a legal entity then, would be outside of our scope, although they 
>>may very well be but not explicitly in BPEL.
>>
>>Reed2: yes, legal mechanisms are outside of scope. However we need to
>>create a "Wally-world" model so our use cases can be clearly communicated.
>>We have actors owned by legal entities, so we know who is talking to whom in
>>our examples.
>>    
>>
>>Reed1: If you agree with the above, then would either of you (Diane or 
>>Monica) have time to sketch out the legal entities, actors and a 
>>business flow for such an intra-enterprise use case?
>>    
>>
>>mm2: You had asked about internal cases, but if I may and as others have 
>>said, it is quite difficult in today's market to differentiate internal 
>>vs. external. But, to your particular question, I have been involved in 
>>a particular challenging case for data compilation for a sales or 
>>product catalog. This is a prime example where the internal vs. external 
>>becomes unclear. Services could be valuable in this series of 
>>interactions between engineering, IT, order management, and other 
>>departments within an enterprise and could involve external players 
>>(such as other partners that provide widget A for package product B) to 
>>compile a functional product catalog uses for product configuration by a 
>>buyer. I think this gets looked over, Harvey when you concentrate too 
>>much on supply chain and disregard what happens before the supply chain 
>>is engaged.
>>
>>Reed2: I don't understand your claim that I am disregarding pre-supply
>>chain activities. What we have is a proposed catalogue structure that allows
>>for the expression of both extra and intra enterprise use cases. In fact the
>>catalogue stresses not to forget intra-enterprise use cases. Please clarify.
>>    
>>
>>Jordan: I agree with Monica that it would be good to have some scenarios that 
>>illustrate usage other than B to B - perhaps enterprise application 
>>integration.
>>    
>>
>>>Evedemon: Hello all, This is a quick reminder about our conf call today at 4 PM ET / 1 PM PT.
>>>
>>>Here is the call-in information:
>>>
>>>Toll-Free (US and Canada): +1 866 500 6738
>>>Toll: +1 203 480 8000
>>>Passcode: 600345
>>>
>>>Here is a quick agenda for today's discussion:
>>>
>>>1. Discussion of Sally's template (UC Template is attached - the website
>>>appears to still be down)
>>>      
>>>
>>>mm1: I have provided comments to Sally.
>>>2. Usage scenario guidelines and catalogue (see attached docs from
>>>Harvey)
>>>3. Discussion/selection of initial usage scenario - I would like us to
>>>prep a nomination to the TC
>>>
>>>mm1: On items #2 and #3, the catalog appears to largely concentrate on
>>>B2B. Should we not approach this from a broader scope that also
>>>includes the enterprise, as we develop the usage scenarios and use
>>>cases? In addition, the addition of legal entity language seems
>>>premature, as we have acknowledge this is possibly an area outside of
>>>the scope of BPEL.
>>>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]