In the beginning of July (09 July 2012 17:01) I answered a mail of Roy Schulte (with 15 more on Cc of involved EPTS members or interested people).
Actually it was an open discussion and David Luckham suggested to discuss publicly on this discussion forum of the CEP community, but then not all wanted to be seen publicly and everybody should contribute by him/herself and should not be quoted if not agreed before (a bit strange for my understanding of a democratic process).
Roy has summarized his mails in his article http://www.complexevents.com/2012/07/25 ... rocessing/
and this is one of the sentences I answered:
...However, I have come to realize that far more IT professionals aren’t sure of what event processing is. Moreover, they don’t buy commercial event-processing platform products because they don’t know why they would want them. This is partly because of the peculiar way the terminology evolved, and partly because of the way that products that do event processing are marketed...
These are typically different questions for different interest-groups:
- Why is there not enough revenue? (actually this is not true for all, like TIBCO and SAP HANA, they allegedly had their best quarter or year ever, based on their CEP-products, why? and others not?)
- Is there still anything to investigate? or was all done 2002 with David's book "The power of events" where David has described and summarized the basic concepts - done by projects started in the nineties already?
The first question is interesting for business people, but not at all for scientists
or universities. You must solve this with your marketing, sales and presales departments which have/had a lot of budgets for that. Typically there is no university involved in this mail-discussion, and obviously they would not be interested in such a EPTS online journal.
The second question is something what is not sufficiently and systematically discussed by the EPTS so far
. It is interesting more for the scientists and depending on the time horizon it is mostly not interesting for the running and near-future business. Science would not get money from the business side to investigate such subjects because no fast enough ROI, so they must write project proposals for DARPA, European Commission, DFG and so on. Normally this is not interesting for the industry/business people, and even it's a risk for the science to include them in such proposals; the reviewers might judge why to support product development of Big Dogs like IBM, SAP, etc. by the money of the tax payers, invest your own money (e.g. Oracle or TIBCO would never join such project proposals). This happened a bit when we submitted the EASSy proposal (Event-based Adaptiveness of Service-based Systems) some years ago where we had the whole prominence of Big Dogs like IBM, SAP, Siemens, Software AG, Thales etc. on bord, proposal failed, also with the criterion "quality of consortium"; the consortium had together around 1 million employees...
(BTW: other proposals with some of the same consortium members like iCORE started end of 2011, with a similar CEP based idea... just ask the reviewers why)
- Next point: use cases (always the same question and often discussed in the last years)
First we will not get a use case from the business side based on a real project, mostly strictly confidential, we always had to sign a NDA when we worked on such projects.
So, use cases can only come from universities, as prototypes or as abstract patterns or so, or as generalized PoC's or similar from your presales people from the industry.
This was actually our first EU project proposal idea 2006, DoReMoPat (Domain Specific Reference Models for Event Patterns, described in this paper http://www.citt-online.com/downloads/Re ... dix_v3.pdf
. EU project was not started respectively withdrawn because of a missing coordinator in the last moment. It would be a nice project idea until today.
2006 we started with the connection of CEP with BPM
at the NY/Hawthorne, first CEP Symposium. Then we described this problem in a paper http://www.citt-online.com/downloads/In ... _Final.pdf
and organized some international workshops about edBPM. This is done now, no research papers anymore, no open research questions as it seems.
But a lot of problems to introduce edBPM in real applications, like we have tried since 2010/2011, e.g. at Deutsche Telekom AG. DTAG also particiapted in some of our workshops. We documented these problems of real edBPM projects on complexevents-forum viewtopic.php?f=13&t=280
, what the practical questions are actually. In the meantime, I am very skeptic that the reality of a large enterprise allows to realize the edBPM idea as a "concert of collaborating processes driven by the real-time analysis of events in the event cloud...". The reasons are not at all research-relevant, but are caused by the past or history and by the nature how such large enterprises do business.
Since 2009 we follow now the idea to transfer the edBPM concept to other non-business domains
and to generalize it as Ubiquitous CEP
(as we tried to focus in special threads on the complexevents-forum viewforum.php?f=13
like Intelligent cars, Robot Companions for citizens, Biology/Epigenetics, Brain Computer Interfaces, etc.) IMO, these are the real interesting future fields and we have already started to contact and cooperate with the specific communities like EUCog, VPH-FET, ECSS, ... This is a challenge what EPTS had to do very much more in order to evangelize CEP or ed(B)PM or U-CEP concepts.
But there would not be ROI within the next year, and so it's interesting for science but not so much for the business people.
Therefore, question again is how to handle these different interest-groups in a EPTS or whereever (NoE directed by a coordinator and a team and a budget e.g. from EU like EUCog, ECSS, VPH... (we would typically need at least 18 months to start such a submission) or democratic organisation with an elected board, budget from the members etc. like ??? international ACM, IEEE, or national GI are a different dimension, nobody would pay fees to EPTS)? and how to work systematically and with real results and progress? Deliverables?