Anders:

I fully agree. The work to define the business centric view has started and is well on its' way as noted in my reply to David. However, the FSV has to support the BOV as per the architecture. Architecture maps the business requirements to a functional set of technologies.

The work I am doing is a forensic analysis of the FSV components (CPP, CPA, BP*, CCTS, MSG, REGREP etc.) and has already yielded many interesting facts.

The two also intersect and reveal areas that need further thinking. For instance, the attribute "isLegalyBinding" is, IMO, irresponsible to place into a BP artifact since laws differ from country to country. It would be impossible to require this declaration until all contexts are known. The BP must reflect this by making this attribute [0..1] IMO.

I am also examining touch points between the FSV components. It appears there may be room for optimization but this cannot be done until the model is complete. That will not happen soon since there is a long way to go.

The real hard work will come when the business centric view is complete and we see if it can map to the architecture of the FSV. That will be hard to do without a metamodel of the ebXML FSV .

Duane