Transcript UN/CEFACT UN/CEFACT TMG Closing Plenary Gunther Stuhec, Chair UNITED NATIONS CENTRE FOR TRADE FACILITATION AND ELECTRONIC BUSINESS Under the auspices of United Nations Economic Commission.

UN/CEFACT
UN/CEFACT TMG
Closing Plenary
Gunther Stuhec, Chair
UNITED NATIONS CENTRE FOR TRADE FACILITATION AND ELECTRONIC BUSINESS
Under the auspices of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
Agenda






This Week
Path Forward of BPSS
Project List
Business Process Working Group
Core Components Working Group
Next Meeting
UN/CEFACT
This week

Made a successful UMM/CCTS Training on Tuesday 1pm –
5pm

Defined and accepted the BPSS strategy

Restarted the Electronic Business Architecture Working Group
– Lead: Anders W. Tell

Agreed on the ATG/ICG/TMG Resolution on UMM/CC/XMI

Agreed on the TMG/TBG on resolve to institute a joint ad-hoc
group Modelers Referrence Initiative (MRI)

Revised the generic UN/CEFACT Permanent Group Terms of
Reference and Procedures

Updated the Project List
UN/CEFACT
Group
Resp
.
Status
Priority
Est. Date
Electronic Business Architecture Specification
EBAWG
AT
ODP=2
middle
End Q4/05
Glossary
EBAWG
JW
ongoing
low
N/A
UMM N090 – Introduction
BPWG
CH
ongoing
middle
End Q4/05
UMM N091 – Metamodel and Specification
BPWG
CH
ODP=3
very
high
End Q3/05
UMM N092 – Methodology and Specification
BPWG
JD
ODP=3
High
End Q3/05
UMM N093 – User Guide
BPWG
BM
First
draft
High
End Q4/05
CCTS Part 1 – Metamodel + Methodology
CCWG
MK
ODP=2
High
End Q3/05
CCTS Part 2 – Message Assembly (working
title)
CCWG
MK
ODP=1
High
End Q2/05
CCTS Part 3 – User Guide
CCWG
MK
Maintenance
low
End Q4/05
UBAC – Metamodel and Specification
UBAC
AT
ODP=2
middle
End Q4/05
BCSS – Specification
BCSS
SC
ODP=3
very
high
End Q3/05
BPSS V1.1 – Specification
BPSS
KH
ODP=6
high
End Q4/05
Project
Documents / Projects
UN/CEFACT
BPSS



Prepare BPSS 1.11 considering all comments Canada,
Sweden, Taiwan, and the United States(Lead: Karlson) –
Timeplan: 2 month from now
Starting the negotiation-phase between TMG and ebBP until
the MoU is signed by UN/CEFACT and OASIS
After signing: Submit a letter about our plans to the ebBP chair
UN/CEFACT
TMG/TBG Modelers Reference Initiative

Stimulate, facilitate and motivate the uptake of the UN/CEFACT
modeling approach to enrich understanding of business
modeling
o
o

Outcomes:
o
o
o

from a business experts and managers perspective
in industry, governments and tool vendors
Value proposition by the next Forum meeting
Provide a modelers workshop to share modeling experiences,
resulting in improved artifacts.
Provide structured and enhanced feedback on the modeling
approach to TMG
Organization
o
o
o
Jointly resourced with members from TMG and TBG
Project Chair (TBG), Ian Watt
Vice Chair (TMG): Anders W. Tell
UN/CEFACT
ATG/ICG/TMG Resolution on
UMM/CC/XMI

Profile for the generation of XMI core components
o
o
o

Conformant to
o
o
o

UMM – responsible: TMG BWG-BCSS
CCTS (mostly as possible) – responsible: TMG CCWG
NDR (mostly as possible) – responsible: ATG2
Tasks
o
o

Will be defined within TMG BCSS
Based on the most commonly XMI version
Can be used in UML compliant software packages
ATG – Automatic generation from XMI to NDR
ICG – Validation checks of XMI output
Future
o
Based on latest version of XMI including MOF
UN/CEFACT
Next Meeting



of all TMG Groups
June 6th – 10th, 2005
in Walldorf, Germany or Brussels, Belgium
UN/CEFACT
Business Process Work Group (BPWG)
Jens Dietrich, Chair
UN/CEFACT
Activities this past week



Work on BCSS
o
Requirements Document (finished)
o
XMI-Profile (conceptual description)
o
UML Profile for Core Components (Metamodel almost finished)
Work on UMM
o
UMM Foundation Module (Metamodel almost finished)
o
UMM-Modelelement (M1)-Naming Rules (agreed on solution)
Work on UBAC
o
Requirements Document (finished)
UN/CEFACT
Steps until next UN/CEFACT Forum


BCSS: finish first working draft
o
XMI-Profile (finish first working draft)
o
UML Profile for Core Components (finish first working draft)
UMM
o
UMM Metamodel Specification (finish first working draft)
o
UMM Methodology + UMM User Guide
(work on first working draft to be finished at the next Forum)

UBAC
o
Work on first working draft
UN/CEFACT
CCTS Project
• Reviewed work on CCTS Project
• Volunteers for comment sections
• MKB will review and group
•
Discussed issues
UN/CEFACT
Issue – UMM/CCTS
• UMM and CCTS should be aligned.
• UMM is not required for CCTS, because some implementers are
outside UN/CEFACT and/or don’t use UML at all.
• CCTS should support the UML constructs/concepts used in UMM
• Alignment should be a separate document.
• TMG should do the alignment.
• Align the UMM metamodel with CCTS.
Issue – ISO 11179
• CCTS should align with ISO 11179 – whenever possible – at the
meta level
• This alignment does not mean conformance
Issue – Secondary
Representation Terms
•
Secondary Representation Terms:
Do we need them?
If yes, should they remain Secondary RTs?
Two viewpoints:
a. Sec Reps are extremely useful and we should not be concerned
with the maintenance issue. They need active use. We need to
improve the CCTS. One solution is to make the current Secondary
Representation Terms Primary instead.
b. Secondary Representation Terms are just for the business term.
Secondary Representations are just restrictions of the Primary.
Instead of Secondary Representations, qualify the Primary with the
term.
Result: Took a straw pole: a = 9, b = 4
Meetings and Calls
• Conference Calls every two weeks
– Mondays
– 10 AM Eastern/3 PM UK/4 PM CET
• Face-to-face meetings
– In conjunction with other meetings
• One day of the TBG17 meeting in May
• 6-June, with TMG, if at SAP
• Before or after TBG17 (1-Aug/Vienna)
Business Message Assembly
Meeting, Wednesday, 11:00 – 12:30
• Activity: Document/Publish/Maintain
• CCWG is responsible –
– This is a new project (working with ATG and TBG and anyone else
interested)
– MKB and Gunther will draft a proposal – working title is Business
Message Assembly
– The draft proposal will be reviewed by the team.
– Project Leader and Editor are not yet determined
• Part of CCTS, under UN/CEFACT could be CCTS-Part 2
Business Message Assembly
Question: Should ‘Business Document Header’ be a part of the
project?
• BDH needs to be aligned to the CCTS.
• CCTS-Part 2 should point to the ‘BDH’ for the business functions
that need it.
• The focus is the business part/not the enveloping
• ‘Business Document Header’ will be a BIE
• Must fit same architecture with BP
Business Message Assembly
Discussion/Decisions
• We need a CC document level ‘thing’
– the concept is similar to an ABIE, but we call it Business Message
– it has properties of its own that are not aggregations - no
agreement – open issue
– no property terms in an ASBIE – agree
• We do not have to have a document level ACC – agreed
• New concepts are needed – this project will develop them
Business Message Assembly
• Next steps
– Finalize and get approval for project proposal
– Announcement and Call for participants
– Name Project Leader and Editor
– Set up list
UN/CEFACT
SIMPLE, TRANSPARENT AND EFFECTIVE PROCESSES
FOR GLOBAL BUSINESS.
UN/CEFACT