Re: gap analysis

This is one reason I suggested a joint meeting/discussion in Tokyo
concerning
the flow models emerging. Clear overlap in the area of flow representation.

Scott Hinkelman, Senior Software Engineer
XML Industry Enablement
IBM e-business Standards Strategy
512-823-8097 (TL 793-8097) (Cell: 512-940-0519)
[email protected], Fax: 512-838-1074



Tony Weida <[email protected]> on 10/16/2000 07:44:14 PM

To:   [email protected]
cc:
Subject:  gap analysis



Responding to the F2F minutes, Marty wrote:

> Tokyo item 3:  My notes show that the gap analysis will be on tpaML vs
the
> XML representation of the business process metamodel.

I understood that we were speaking about gap analysis vs. the UML, not XML,
version of the BP metamodel.  In any case, the team should compare tpaML
with the UML version because (1) the UML version has fairly mature and
stable semantics, and (2) we agreed that BP XML must have the same
semantics, particularly choreography, as BP UML.  Apart from having the
same
semantics as the UML version, it's still quite unclear what the XML version
will be -- tomorrow the BP metamodel group will begin discussion of one new
proposal.  I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but as Karsten wrote
in
another note "This document is just one of several possible approaches. The
metamodel group as such will determine whether to move forward with this
approach or some other approach."

Tony Weida
Edifecs