W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

RE: Business Preotocol (was: Application Protocol Definition)

From: James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 14:29:38 -0800
To: bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org, www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF94D0BB9.3AE4FD53-ON88256CDA.007B4C10-88256CDA.007B9078@us.ibm.com>

The term "business protocols" as I've been using it would encompass the 
broad family of technology-independent business protocols available.  
RosettaNet PIP 3A4, ebXML BPSS would all fall under this category so we're 
not usurping anything. 

- James Snell
     IBM Emerging Technologies
     jasnell@us.ibm.com
     (559) 587-1233 (office)
     (700) 544-9035 (t/l)
     Programming Web Services With SOAP
         O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952

     Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. 
     Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your 
     God will be with you whereever you go.    - Joshua 1:9



bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>
Sent by: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
02/27/2003 02:23 PM

To
www-ws-arch@w3.org
cc

bcc

Subject
RE: Business Preotocol (was: Application Protocol Definition)




Assaf Arkin asked:
> Would 'business protocol' be the best term to describe both 5 & 6?

There are already a number of business protocols
{e.g. offer-acceptance and the various auction forms }
that could be implemented in many ways
(e.g. RosettaNet PIP 3A4, ebXML BPSS, etc.).

If you usurp the term "business protocol" for
particular technical implementations, then
what do you call the technology-independent
business protocols that you are implementing?
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:29:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT