Rosettanet as Canonical Model?

Question

Hi All,

We know that Rosettanet standards have been here for quite sometime in B2B integration. I was under impression that we use this standard for exchanging messages between trading partners who are connected through a transport mechanism. While this is a perfect scenario on RN usage, I have a different thought of using RN in other scenarios. I wanted to validate if we can really use Rosettanet as a canonical model for exchanging messages within company's intranet. I want to use only the RN schemas to represent the messages in canonical model and it could not have the complete Rosettnet setup like the private and public initiators/processes....only using the RN schemas to represent my messages. Can we really do it? What is biztalk community's thoughts on this approach?

Thanks,

Arun

Answer 1

Then you can do a POC using the RNIF Schemas available as part of SDK.

---

Don't forget to mark the post as answer or vote as helpful if it does, Regards -Rohit Sharma (http://rohitbiztalk.blogspot.com)

Answer 2

Hi Arun,

As excerpt from the White Paper "Using_canonical_formats_with_BizTalk_Server" by Richard Sargeant from motion10:

"The overall structure of the canonical format can be designed in one of three ways:

• Application driven
• B2B driven
• Generic (build from scratch)

Application driven is useful where a single back-office application is used to generate all outgoing messages and process all incoming messages. As such, the canonical format could match the format used by the back-office application (for example: an SAP IDOC). However, this does make the complete system more sensitive to changes in requirements or business logic. Also any changes may need to be implemented within the back-office and that is often more labor intensive than modifying a BizTalk map.

B2B driven takes the other extreme and bases the structure on the B2B format being used by the partners such as EDIFACT or xCBL, etc. The disadvantage with this is that the structure tends to be very large and sometimes overly complex.

I personally prefer the generic approach to build a schema from scratch. This allows the schema to exactly match the requirements of both the business and IT. The structure can also be created to make the mapping as easy as possible by avoiding large differences in structures."

HTH

Steef-Jan Wiggers

Ordina ICT B.V. | MVP & MCTS BizTalk Server 2010

http://soa-thoughts.blogspot.com/ | @SteefJan

If this answers your question please mark it accordingly

---

BizTalk