Whatever it doesn't do, BCM does.
:P
lol
Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>
> Wow, CAM does everything.
>
> Tell me David, what does it not do?
>
> :-)
>
> -Matt
>
> On Apr 20, 2004, at 5:11 PM, David RR Webber wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
> The later - dynamic interface configuration - is the domain
> of CAM - acting as a service of registry.
>
> We can do one part of this already. Given a context
> configuration - you apply your context values - and
> CAM will adjust the interchange content accordingly.
>
> Example - if you are a supplier in Canada to GM in
> Detroit - you need to provide cross-border shipment
> information - while if you are in Michigan - you don't.
>
> That's the point of the work on Context for BPSS
> V2.0 that we have in place.
>
> This then allows you to configure a catalogue of
> business process components into which you put -
> CPA, Context, BPSS and CAM templates - and
> when discovery occurs - the new partner can
> configure the Context and load the templates into
> their software and start using it.
>
> The second part of your scenario - automatic
> interchange linkage is also facilitated by CAM
> templates - and here is where the UID mechanism
> is vital. This allows you to have agent software
> that matches UIDs in target and source nouns.
> Then there are the noun definitions themselves -
> we're working on that in SCM at the moment.
> That is the other piece of the puzzle needed by
> CAM and the agent - to be able to automatically
> pull the facet and predicate information for a
> given UID of a noun - and then apply those
> rules to the mapping. The OWL work in SCM
> is also very important to be able to classify and
> relate like / equivalent / and similar parts so the
> software agent can determine that a UID from
> one domain is actually related to a UID from
> another.
>
> The peices are there - what is needed as ever
> is projects and funding to validate it and complete
> the detail implementation.
>
> DW
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chiusano Joseph" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:29 PM
> Subject: [regrep] Dynamic Discovery/Binding/Invocation
>
> The following question might sound silly coming from someone who knows
> our spec so well, but it's a usage scenario that I just had to begin to
> think about.
>
> Is anyone using ebXML Registry for dynamic discovery/binding/invocation
> of Web Services? More specifically:
>
> - A Web Service would dynamically discover another Web Service;
>
> - It would use the discovered Web Service's interface definitions (e.g.
> WSDL document) to dynamically construct message definitions that conform
> to the discovered Web Service's interface definitions;
>
> - It would then map its data to these messages definitions and invoke
> the discovered Web Service;
>
> If no one is using an ebXML Registry this way, how close are we to this?
> It seems to me that the "dynamically constructed messages definitions",
> and - even more so - the dynamic mapping, would be challenging. Does
> this fall more under semantic technologies? If so, will it ever be
> possible?
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
> --
> Kind Regards,
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton
>
> 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
> 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
> ___________________________
> Matthew MacKenzie
> Senior Architect
> IDBU Server Solutions
> Adobe Systems Canada Inc.
> http://www.adobe.com/products/server/
>
> +1 (506) 871.5409
--
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
