MXPA00011320A - System and method for creating an object workspace - Google Patents

Abstract

A computer workspace comprises a plurality of memory slots, the memory slots each operable to store at least one object. The computer workspace further comprises a permissibility framework in communication with the computer workspace, the permissibility framework maintaining access rights to each memory slot. The computer workspace further comprises an event manager in communication with the memory slots and the permissibility framework, the event manager being operable to generate messages in response to the memory slots being accessed and further in response to the access rights maintained by the permissibility framework.

Description

SYSTEM AND METHOD TO CREATE A WORK SPACE FOR AN OBJECT TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION This invention relates in general to the field of supply chain, business and planning site, and more particularly, to a system and method for creating a workspace for an object.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION The applications and the supply chain, business and planning site environments are widely used by the manufacturing entities for decision support and for assistance in administration operations. The decision support environments for the supply chain, the company and the planning site have evolved from single-domain monolithic environments to multi-domain monolithic environments. Conventional planning software applications are available in a wide range of products offered by several companies. These decision support tools allow entities to make complex management operations more efficient. However, supply chains are generally characterized by multiple, distributed and heterogeneous planning environments.

Therefore, there are limits to the effectiveness of conventional environments when applied to the problem of supply chain planning due to monolithic application architectures. In addition, these problems are exacerbated when there is no "owner" of the entire supply chain.

It is desirable for the next step to evolve it for the planning environments to establish a heterogeneous architecture of multiple domains that supports multiple domains of product expansion, as well as products and multiple expansion engines. The integration of the various planning environments in a seamless solution can allow supply chain planning between the company and between the domain. In addition, an important function provided by some planning applications is to optimize the object environment rather than simply the tracking transactions. In particular, the RHYTH family of products available from 12 Technologies provides optimization functionality. However, with respect to planning at the enterprise supply chain level, many conventional applications, such as those available from SAP, use Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) engines and do not provide optimization.

The success or failure of a company may depend to a large extent on the quality of the decision made Inside the company. Therefore, decision support software, such as the RHYTHM product family of 12 Technologies, which supports an optimal decision within companies can be particularly important for the success of the company. In general, optimal decisions are related to the domain of decision support where the domain is the extension of the "world" considered to reach the decision. For example, the decision that is being made may be that both a given item must produce a factory for a given period of time. The "optimal" answer will depend on the domain of the decision. The domain can be, for example, just the factory itself, the supply chain that contains the factory, the entire company, or the supply chain of multiple companies. (The last two can be considered as the largest domains or multiple domains). Typically, the larger the domain of decision support, the better the decision will be. Consequently, it will be desirable for decision support software to cover even larger domains in the process of making the decision. However, this expansion of coverage can create significant problems.

Associated with the current decision support software that is being too limited to cover a multiple domain decision support structure or expanding domain is the fact that such software is limited by an inability to provide a common workspace that be accessible through a multiple domain or expanded domain environment. In a multiple domain or expanded environment, current decision support software is unable to share and communicate information and objects in a way that facilitates cooperation and compatibility across the entire environment. Changes in a chain of events made by a particular company or facility within a company can not be properly followed and used by other companies or other facilities with the same company. The decision support software must therefore deal with large amounts of data and objects that have a local and / or global significance in the environment. Proper access, storage and maintenance of such information and objects becomes increasingly difficult as the environment expands.

SYNTHESIS OF THE INVENTION According to an object of the present invention, a system and an object to create an object workspace are described that provide advantages over the storage of information and conventional objects, access and maintenance in the monolithic, multiple domain environment. .

According to one aspect of the present invention, a computer workspace comprises a plurality of memory slots, the memory slots each being operable to store at least one object. The computer workspace also includes a framework of permissibility in communication with the workspace of the computer, the permissibility framework maintains access rights to each memory slot. The workspace of the computer also includes an administration of events in communication with the memory slots and the permissibility framework, the event manager is operable to generate event notifications in response to the memory slots being accessed and also taking in how much the access rights maintained by the transmissibility framework.

A technical advantage of the present invention is that of providing an improved object workspace. More specifically, a technical advantage of several embodiments of the present invention is the ability to share the object resources in a workspace among a plurality of resource users. Another advantage of at least one embodiment of the present invention is that of allowing a system that implements a framework of permissibility for the object resources of the workspace in order to allow different resource users different levels of access to the resources of the work space. shared object. Another advantage achieved by an aspect of the present invention is the ability to generate event notifications for users of designated resources based on the modification occurring within the resources of object.

The additional technical advantages should be readily apparent to one skilled in the art of the following figures, descriptions and claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS A more complete understanding of the present invention and the advantages thereof can be acquired with reference to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which the like reference numerals indicate like characteristics and wherein: Figure 1 is a diagram of an implementation of a computer-implemented architecture that can support the collaboration of companies.

Figure 2 is a diagram of an incorporation of the components of a global collaboration framework.

Figure 3 is a diagram of the overall collaboration framework of Figure 2 wherein certain software elements that constitute the particular modules are highlighted.

Figure 4 is a block diagram of an incorporation of a system that allows collaboration within and between companies for an optimal decision.

Figure 5 is a block diagram of an incorporation of the use of a global collaborative workspace.

Figure 6 is a diagram of an incorporation of a life cycle for a collaboration.

Figure 7 is a diagram of situations where common software is present on both sides of a relationship and where it is not.

Figure 8 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a security configuration for a case of axis to radio and axis to network.

Figure 9 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a security configuration of a case from axis to axis.

Figure 10 is a diagram of an incorporation of a workflow design among companies that includes the parameterization on groups.

Figure 11 is a diagram of an administration change incorporation by modifying a design of a workflow.

Figure 12 is a diagram of an incorporation of the integration of a workflow with the outside world.

Figure 13 is a diagram of an incorporation of a data flow that runs in a single activity.

Figure 14 is a diagram of an incorporation of a data stream divided through multiple activities.

Figure 15 is a block diagram of an incorporation of a common data model that is based on the transformation model.

Figure 16 is a diagram of an embodiment of a direct transformation.

Figure 17 is a diagram of an incorporation of different levels of access and transformation.

Figure 18 is a diagram of an incorporation of the replacement of an axle motor for a radio engine within a collaboration.

Figure 19 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a computer system employing a workspace configured according to the teachings of the present invention; Y Figure 20 is a diagram of an embodiment of the workspace of Figure 19 configured according to the teachings of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The improvement of decision support processes involves the expansion to provide decision support at the multi-company level and at the enterprise level for an optimal decision making. Technologically and conceptually, providing multi-company or enterprise level decision support differs from providing decision support at the factory level and supply chain level. The reasons for this may be that in situations of multiple domains (such as business units within a company or multiple companies), different domains frequently operate different decision support software. Also, in situations of multiple domains, one domain generally can not force another domain to be a particular decision. In other words, the support of the optimal decision in this environment often requires the be carried out in a negotiated environment as opposed to coercive.

Providing decision support in situations of multiple domains can be accomplished for the purpose of a collaborative approach to decision support rather than a coercive one. Several communication and distributed processing technologies can be used to implement such an environment, including the Internet, the Web, JAVA, XML, CORBA, etc., which help make possible a large-scale collaboration decision. Products will soon be available from 12 Technologies that allows a collaborative approach to decision support including RHYTHM-GLOBAL COLLABORATION MANAGER (GCM) and RHYTHM-GLOBAL COLLABORATION DESIGNER (GCD).

The Collaboration System and the Process Components Figure 1 is a diagram of an implementation of a computer-implemented architecture that can support the collaboration of companies. As shown, a global decision support architecture can be built over an underlying link, vision, global message and information store components. The collaboration can then involve a global collaboration designer (GCD) and a global collaboration analyzer (GCM) supporting the architecture of decision support. The global collaboration designer can be used to design and instantiate collaborations, and the global collaboration manager can be used to run the collaborations. In this scheme, collaborations can be mentioned as modules and can be versions.

Figure 2 is a diagram of an incorporation of components of a global collaboration framework. As shown, the framework can allow an axis 2 company to collaborate with a radio company 4 and a network company 6. The company axis 2 and the company radio 4 each include a global collaboration manager 8. Global collaboration administrators 8 are coupled and communicate with the respective internal global collaboration workspaces 10. An external global collaboration workspace 12 provides a means to share data between an axis 2 company, a radio company 4 and a network enterprise 6. The axis 2 company can also collaborate through an electronic data exchange processor (EDI) 14 with an added value network (VAN). In addition, the axis 2 company can communicate and collaborate with another company axis using a global message bus 15.

In the operation, the primary controller of the collaboration can be the GCM 8 engine of a company axis 2. The relation of axis to axis can be facilitated by the message bus global 15, and axis-to-radio and axis-to-network relationships can be facilitated by the external global collaboration (GCW) workspace 12. As shown, a 2-axis enterprise can generally have a global collaborative workspace 10 and an external global collaboration workspace 12. The internal global collaboration workspace 10 can be used to share and exchange information with internet user interconnections as well as with an electronic information exchange processor 14. The space of Global collaboration work 12 can be used to share and exchange information with radio companies 4 and companies axis.

For security, the external global collaboration workspace 12 can be installed in a DM2 or outside a corporate fire wall of an axis 2 company. In this way there are no necessary direct connections that have to be made from outside the network. corporate protected axis 2. The external global collaboration workspace can accept, for example, IIOP, HTTP and HTTPS connections. In particular, the last two connections are useful for bridging existing fire wall configurations. In this way, a fire wall configuration on either the client side (radio node or network node) or the server (hub node) that can make the solution more rapidly deployable is not necessary.

Figure 3 is a diagram of a global collaboration network of Figure 2 wherein certain software elements that constitute particular modules are highlighted. As can be seen, the software for the global collaboration management module can be present in the following places: in the axis motor 8, in the radio engine 8, in the user-user interface interconnection (Ul), in the Ul of radio-user and the Ul of network-node. Additionally, the module can communicate with native applications 17 about the company axis 2 and the company radio 4. The communications with the native applications 17 can be either synchronous (dotted line) or asynchronous (solid line). Asynchronous communication with the native applications 17 can be facilitated by the internal global collaboration workspace 10, as shown. In addition, a global series database (GSDB) can be present on the side 2 of the company axis.

Figure 4 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a system, indicated generally with the number 16, which allows collaboration between and through the companies for an optimal decision making. As shown, the system 16 includes an axis node 18 which can be a process within an axis motor running a computer system. The axis node 18 is coupled to and communicates with a radio node 20 which can also be a process within an axis motor running on a computer system. How I know shows, the radio node 20 can be outside an enterprise boundary 22 of the hub node 18. The hub node 18 is also coupled to and communicates with a plurality of radio nodes 24 which can be processed within an engine of radio that runs one or more computer systems. The cube node 18 can also be coupled to and communicate with a plurality of network nodes 26 which can be processed within a network explorer running on a computer system. In addition, the hub node 18 is coupled to and communicates with a representative of the EDI (electronic data exchange) 28 which can provide a gate to the electronic data exchange systems.

Shaft motors and radio engines, together with the global collaborative workspace, can be primary entities of a global collaboration manager.

In this environment, a cube engine is the primary controller of the collaboration. The shaft motor can coordinate with both global collaborations as well as with local collaborations. Global collaborations are those that reach axis nodes 18, radio nodes 20 and 24 and network nodes 26. A local collaboration can run on any single paper any axis or radio / radio group. These collaborations can be distributed, but remain within the confines of a single company. The axis motors can also be coordinated with the user-axis interconnections (Ul) as well as with the processor VAN-EDI of an electronic data exchange representative 28. In one embodiment, axis engines are multi-chip engines that can simultaneously coordinate multiple collaborations as well as multiple versions of the same collaboration. In addition, the axis motors can dynamically load and execute the collaborations.

The radio engine can also operate to initiate a collaboration. In this environment, unlike an axis motor, a radio engine is not an independent entity. Instead of this a radio engine can only coordinate a collaboration in conjunction with an axis motor. In addition, a radio engine can not coordinate with other radio engines or other network nodes. As an axis motor, a radio engine can be multi-woofed and can simultaneously coordinate multiple collaborations as well as multiple versions of the same collaboration. Radio engines can also dynamically load and execute collaborations.

Figure 5 is a block diagram of an incorporation of the use of a global collaboration workspace 30. In Figure 5, the global collaboration workspace 30 provides the primary entity used to share information / objects among the various entities in the collaboration. As shown, workspace 30 can interconnect with global collaboration administrators (GCMs) 32, with a local system 34, with a network server 36 and a network interconnect 37 and native applications 38. In general, objects can be placed in a global collaborative workspace 30 by an entity and retrieved by another entity. The recovery can be achieved either by question or by subscription. In this way, the global collaboration workspace 30 combines the attributes of a database as well as a message bus.

The global collaboration workspace can be organized as a hierarchy of slots which can be in memory or be persistent. Slots can also be glued or regular, and fine grain allowances can be attached to each slot. Permits can be assigned by the operation by the user. The memory slots retain their data in the volatile memory. The writing and recovery of the memory slots is very fast but is subject to loss if the global collaboration workspace 30 goes down. When used with slot memories, the global collaboration workspace 30 can be considered as an object database information in secure and fast memory, with security and message capabilities. Persistent slots retain your data in stable storage. The writing and recovery of persistent slots is slower than for memory slots, but the data is not lost if the workspace of Global collaboration 30 goes down.

The decision to either use in-memory or persistent slots may depend on the application. The global collaboration workspace 30 stores the data in the form of objects and can store Java objects, CORBA objects, or arbitrary byte arrays. This, coupled with its in-memory capabilities, makes the global collaborative workspace 30 suitable as a mechanism for sharing high-speed data among other object-oriented memory engines such as the supply chain planner and the factory scheduler. 12 Technologies.

A Global Collaboration Designer (GCD) provides a tool to allow the collaboration of designers to interactively design, launch and deploy collaborations to be run using the global collaboration manager. The output of the global collaboration designer is a code that can be automatically loaded and run by the global collaboration manager. The global collaboration designer can allow designers to create new collaborations, retrieve existing collaborations, and version collaborations. The global collaboration designer can also allow designers to design the hub and spoke network for collaborations and design events and messages for collaboration. The designer of Global collaboration can integrate a standard object library and a standard component library for easy use from within the global collaboration designer. The global collaboration designer can be used to create workflows of multiple sophisticated enterprises with synchronous, asynchronous, sub-workflow, and divisions, or divisions, synchronization-joints, heterofixed divisions, heterofixed joints, etc. Global workflows and local workflows can be created both. The global collaboration designer can provide automatic verification of collaborations and automatic code generation, whose code is run by the global collaboration manager. The generated code can be manually edited if desired. In addition, the global collaboration designer can provide the installation of a collaboration including the generation of security administrator configurations and global collaboration workspace configurations.

Figure 6 is a diagram of an incorporation of a life cycle for a collaboration. As shown, in the step, a collaboration can be designed using the global collaboration designer. Then, in step 46, a collaboration can be instantiated using the global collaboration designer. Instanced collaboration can then be deployed, in step 44, using the global collaboration designer and the global collaboration administrator. After deployment, the collaboration can be run using the global collaboration manager in step 46. Subsequently, a new case can be created or a new version of the collaboration can be created. To create a new case, the flow returns to step 42. For a new version, the global collaboration designer can be used in step 48 to modify the collaboration.

The extension from the single domain decision support to the multiple domain decision support can be complicated. In particular, the following discussion describes a number of challenges presented by the decision support of multiple domains and the incorporations of how these challenges are examined by the present system and the process that allows collaboration within and between companies for a decision making optimum Representational Heterogeneity A problem with collaboration is making a bridge between companies through a representative heterogeneity. Before a successful collaboration can occur, the heterogeneity of representation across companies requires being bridged. Companies often represent the same data in different ways. These differences vary from semantic differences to differences technological, to differences in names etc. An obvious solution to bridge these differences is standardization. However, this immediately raises the issue of what is the standard on which it should be agreed. The present system and the process avoid such a requirement.

It should be noted that there may be three relevant categories of standards that need to be examined. These three categories are format standards, transport standards and semantic standards. The format standards refer to the technological formats in which the data / objects are encoded. For example, examples include XML, Java Serial Streams, IIOP Serial Streams, and the electronic data exchange information format. Transportation standards are used to pass data. These can include HTTP, IIOP, RMI, DCOM, FTP, Value Added Networks, asynchronous message bus such as MQSeries, etc. Third, semantic standards are the way in which the semantic content of the data is described. Examples include electronic data exchange, 12 common data model (CDM).

By considering the standards in this light, an understanding of the issues may arise. A large amount of the current confusion stems from the fact that there may be standards covering two or more of the categories above. mentioned and that the discussions of the various standards fail to categorize which category is being discussed. For example, electronic data exchange is primarily a semantic standard, but also typically involves a format standard (the electronic data exchange file format) and a transport (a value-added network). Once this is understood, it becomes clear that the semantic standard of electronic data exchange can be separated from the other two. Therefore, semantic electronic data exchange objects can be encoded in other formats such as Java Serial Streams and can be passed over other transport standards such as HTTP. Similarly, XML is primarily a format standard that can be used to encode several semantic standards. Efforts are being made to codify the electronic data exchange in KML.

Several format standards can be supported by the current global collaboration manager, including XML, the electronic data exchange format, the Java series streams (mentioned as Java format and not to be confused with the Java language or the Java platform) and the IIOP series currents. Of these, in an incorporation, the Java format is the primary format, and the rest are derived formats. Because the Java format can contain the behavior to produce the other formats, it has been chosen as the primary format. The XML, EDI, and IIOP formats can be derived from the Java format.

Figure 7 is a diagram of situations where the common 12 Technologies computer program is present on both sides of a relationship where it is not. As shown, for example, when the GLOBAL RHYTHM COLLABORATION ADMINISTRATOR is on both sides, nothing will be gained by converting to an intermediate format. This will introduce unnecessary inefficiency, and only the data (not the objects) would be interchangeable, limiting the range of applications. Therefore, when the same computer program is present on both sides, ordinary Java objects can be exchanged directly. On the other hand, for example, when the GLOBAL RHYTHM COLLABORATION ADMINISTRATOR is present on only one side, the XML or EDI (output) and interpreted (input) "objects" can be produced.

With respect to transportation standards, this global collaboration manager can support a variety of transport standards including HTTP, IIOP, and asynchronous message buses. Further details are provided below with respect to the multiple handling relationship types.

With respect to semantic standards, the The present global collaboration administrator can support primarily two semantic standards, EDI and RHYTHM-CDM. Electronic data exchange can be supported because this is usually the most popular semantic standard. However, it suffers from the disadvantage (among others) of not providing deep coverage of the planning domain. The RHYTHM-CDM, on the other hand, provides deep coverage of the planning domain and will provide appropriate constructions to carry out decision support of multiple companies. Additionally, this format is supported by all the 12 Technologies planning engines.

In general, a problem with public standards, such as electronic data exchange, is that they can not adequately cover the kinds of data / objects that companies would like to exchange. In addition, waiting for standards bodies to be standardized on a particular object may not be an option, and a supply chain will have no particular competitive advantage by using public standards. For these and other reasons, the present global collaboration manager supports an alternative approach to standardization by supporting proprietary community standards. For example, using the RHYTHM-GCD, a community of companies can design a set of standards that are relevant to only that community. The RHYTHM-GCM will support and enforce these community standards owners The RHYTHM-GCD also holds a library of building block objects that may be composed of proprietary community standards. The proprietary community standards have a number of advances, including: these can be designed to exactly cover the kinds of data / objects that companies would like to exchange; only the relevant parts require agreeing on the particular standard, therefore the process will be faster than waiting for a standard body; the different standards can be developed for different categories of partners and, in the extreme case, a different standard for each partner; and standards can be developed that give the supply chain a competitive advantage over competitors.

Multiple Relationship Types Another problem to allow collaboration is the management of multiple relationship types. Companies have relationships of various types with their partners. Some forms of relationships that may vary are: between the main trading partners on the one hand and between the smaller trading partners on the other; between companies of approximately equal influence over the supply chain and between companies of unequal influence over the supply chain; and between companies with a high degree of technological sophistication on the other hand and between companies with an unequal degree of technological sophistication on the other. As will be understood, these types of different relationships must be handled differently.

The present global collaboration manager can model business relationships as an axis and radio network, as described above and shown in Figure 4. In this embodiment, the four types of relationships are from axis to network; from axis to -VAN- electronic data exchange; from axis to radius and from axis to axis. Each type of relationship has its proper use.

With regard to the network axis, when people today speak of "E-Commerce", they often involve an architecture where the network explorer speaks to a centralized server. This architecture has some advantages: the infrastructure for the support of this architecture is already typically in place; and all administration can be centralized on the server side. However, this architecture also has a great disadvantage in that it requires the presence of a human on the side of the network explorer. Therefore, automation from system to system is not possible. Based on these advantages and disadvantages, this type of relationship can be seen when a company requires the exchange of information with either a junior partner or a partner with less technological sophistication.

With respect to axis-to-VAN-electronic data exchange, the vast majority of electronic business-to-business commerce today takes place by sending electronic data exchange over aggregate heat networks. The advantage of this approach can be that system-to-system integration is possible and that you are currently supported today. The disadvantages of this approach are: the large costs to send data on proprietary VANs; the high administrative costs due to the lack of true standardization; the requirement of third-party tools just to convert from the true "standard" to an appropriate form for the company; there is no support for system-to-human integration; and there is no support for proprietary standards or corporate standards. Based on these and other advantages and disadvantages, this type of relationship may be appropriate when supporting a legacy VAN-electronic data exchange environment.

With respect to the axis-to-radio, this type of relationship also allows a system-to-system integration such as the VAN-electronic data exchange. Architecturally the axis to radio is a collaboration between an axis motor and a radio engine. The axis-to-radio ratio can have the advantages of VAN-inte electronic data change; it can use the public internet to reduce network costs; administrative costs are much lower than those of VAN-exchange of J &G-, electronic data because a large part of the network infrastructure from axis to radio can be displayed centrally and managed; the real objects (in addition to just the information) can be exchanged allowing much more advanced collaborations; and multiple semantic standards can be supported including electronic data exchange, common 12-data model and proprietary community standards. Based on the above mentioned characteristics, the axis-to-radio ratio may be appropriate when companies wish to carry out system-to-system collaboration. It may also be appropriate where a software program of 12 Technologies is not present in any of the companies. This is due to the ratio of axis to radius that can be displayed centrally by the axis company.

With respect to the axis to axis, the ratio is similar to that of axis to radius except that it takes place between the two axis motors rather than an axis and a radius motor. Due to this characteristic, the axis-to-axis relationship may be appropriate among companies that wish to carry out a system-to-system collaboration. In addition, the axis-to-axis relationship may be appropriate when two companies have a separately purchased RHYTHM-GCM and have placed their axis motors.

There are differences between shaft motors and radio motors. In general, shaft motor capacities are superimposed on radio motor capabilities. The following Table provides an example of some of the differences.

TABLE Security An additional problem with a collaboration is the challenge of providing a comprehensive security.

Before companies can collaborate effectively, the security issue needs to be examined.

There are many different facets to security in a context of collaboration. A collaboration chart of any multiple companies must refer to all these different facets. The requirements for a collaborative security network may include that: data exchange between the two partners should only be seen by the two partners; that the data exchanged between the two partners should be invasion-proof; a company must be able to verify that a partner is who says it is; the box should not introduce new security holes in the partners' network; and the table should be relatively easy to set up and administer.

A security collaboration framework can be provided by implementing a comprehensive security strategy to address the above requirements. In an incorporation, the strategy has three different aspects for this: technological security, a frame allowance and data division.

The technological security can refer to the technological means used to guarantee security. This security can be used to provide: privacy, verification, and information integrity. The privacy ensures that no unauthorized person can see the data. Authentication involves authenticating that the parties to the collaboration are really who they claim to be. Data integrity involves making it impossible for a person not authorized to modify the data that is being sent in any form.

The precise safety approach may vary based on the type of relationship described above. For example, a schema is detailed in the Table below: TABLE 2 As can be seen from the Table, all types of relationships, with the exception of the axis-to-VAN EDI, can support security from SSL 3.0.

SSL 3.0 is a standard industry protocol used to support public key encryption over a socket-based connection and provides: privacy, client and server certification, data integrity and certified handling. SSL 3.0 is a higher level protocol in which several public key cryptographic algorithms can be connected including RSA and Diffie-Helman.

Once the SSL greeting is completed, the next step is authentication of the keyword of the user's name. This provides certification beyond what SSL 3.0 itself provides. Keys can be stored using keyword-based PKCS5 coding (an RSA standard). Once a user or radio is certified, it is returned to an access sample. This access sample has a time life specifiable by the administrator. A user can then access the system for the duration of the validity of the access sample. This has the beneficial effect of not requiring certification for each access. Each application which is accessed, certifies the access sample by validating the signature (which is a summary encoded using the private key of the security administrator) of the administrator of said security.

The technological safety box is a part of the safety scheme. The other part has to do with the design of the collaborations themselves. The table should allow Companies easily give permits to various actions that other companies can carry out. The global collaboration workspace can support a hierarchical permission model with individual permissions attached to different data elements in the hierarchy. In particular, it can support read, write, take and subscribe permissions of specific user and specific speaker. Therefore, companies can fine-tune in detail who can read and what data, who can write what data, who can take that data and who can subscribe to write notifications about what data.

A third element in the collaboration framework's security strategy is the ability for data sharing across multiple collaborative workspaces. In particular, collaborative workspaces are divided into an internal collaborative workspace and an external collaborative workspace. Only the data that requires being truly shared with the partners are in the external collaborative workspace. The rest is in the internal collaborative workspace. The external collaborative workspace is designed to be located either outside the corporate fire wall or in an extranet or DMZ. The collaborative framework design does not require the external collaborative workspace to make decisions through the corporate firewall on the Intranet (even though it could do so).

In an incorporation, global collaborations can use both external and internal collaborative workspaces. Local collaborations can use only the internal collaborative workspace and are therefore invisible to the partner companies. Even for global collaborations, only the relevant parties use the external collaborative workspace. In addition, due to the permissibility work framework described above, each partner company can only see (read, write, take, subscribe) its own data.

Figure 8 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a security configuration for a case of axis to radio and axis to network. As shown, a hub company 50 is coupled to and communicates with an internal global collaboration workspace 52 and an external global collaboration workspace 54. A radio company 56 and a network company 58 are connected through a server 60 network to an external global collaboration workspace 54. The company network 56, as the company axis 50, has an internal global collaboration workspace 62. Companies 50, 56 and 58 can be protected by associated firewalls, while the extranet formed by the network server 60 and the external global collaboration workspace 54 can be protected by a filtering director and the communication via HTTP over SSL 3.0.

Figure 9 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a security configuration for an axis-to-axis case. As shown, a 64-axis company and a 66-axis company can communicate over a protected TCP / IP SSL 3.0 connection. The communication can be between the global message agents 68 and 69. Both enterprises of axis 64 and 66 are protected by a firewall, as shown.

Work Flows Between Companies One of the problems with the decision support of multiple companies may be that there is no closed-loop collaboration. Instead, data can be thrown from one company to the next without a coherent workflow. In order to implement a closed-loop collaboration, support is needed to create workflows for multiple companies. The current administrator and global collaboration designer makes it possible to build, deploy, monitor and change workflows of multiple sophisticated companies.

In general, a "workflow" can be a set of "activities" linked together by data flows that together achieve some task. Workflows are typically executed on workflow engines. A "distributed workflow" can refer to a workflow that is executed on multiple workflow engines. In others words, different parts of the workflow are executed on different machines or engines. A "node" can refer to the abstract entities on which different workflow engines run from a distributed workflow run and a "node group" can be a set of nodes grouped by some characteristics. A "distributed workflow of multiple companies" can be distributed workflows where the nodes are companies.

The parameterization of workflows can be important for the collaboration of companies. A "parametric workflow" is a workflow that is parameterized over several variables and can be regular or distributed. The instantiation of the parametric workflow with different values of the parameter variables produces different instances of the workflow. A "distributed workflow parametized over nodes in a node group" can refer to distributed workflows of the workflow parameters are the nodes in a node group. Therefore, when the workflow is instantiated it is tailored to a particular node in a node group.

There are several important features for workflows that can be supported by the present global collaboration. These workflows can be strongly typified. Strong typing is essential to produce error-free and robust workflows. In essence, strong typing guarantees the type of a message in a design time. For example, if the workflow is designed to send a material account, then strong typing ensures that it is physically impossible for an object other than a material account to be sent. For a workflow designed with the global collaboration designer and executed with the global collaboration manager, it can make it impossible to still send an object of the wrong type. This capability is important to produce error-free and robust workflows.

Despite the strong typing there are, for example, two scenarios in which incorrect types of objects would be conceivably passed in the workflow: due to an error on the part of the designer of the workflow; and a malicious attempt by someone to harm the work flow. Both of these scenarios can be managed. The first can be managed by making it impossible for an error in design to lead to such a scenario. The second can be handled by making the data flow to proof of violation by using a public key encoding or other coding scheme (characteristic integrity) as described above.

Another important feature is the support for the workflows parameterized on the groups. Some workflows of multiple companies involve a large number of companies. In such cases, it would be impractical to create individualized workflows for each partner. Instead of this it can be advantageous to create workflows that are parameterized on groups of partners. For example, in the field of procurement, two groups can be primary providers and secondary suppliers. The primary provider group can have one type of workflow and the secondary provider group can have another type of workflow. Group-based workflows can be parametric in the sense that at the time run, a current workflow can be created specific to a member of a group.

In the context of multiple companies, a company can collaborate, for example, with hundreds or thousands potentially of other companies. Each collaboration or workflow of multiple companies can be potentially (and typically) unique. However, the design of thousands of specialized workflows with business partners is neither desirable nor possible. On the other hand, many of these workflows are simply parametric variations on an underlying parameterized workflow. For example, a company A can be a collaborator (in sales) with retailers, distributors, direct sales, etc. Therefore, it makes sense to group the various partners. An example grouping can be: alMart, Sears; he rest of retailers besides WalMart and Sears (group); primary distributors (group) and secondary distributors (group); Now, the workflows with all the members, for example, of the group of primary distributors are variations on an underlying parametric distributed workflow, parameterized on the particular distributor in that group.

Workflows that are parameterized on groups can be supported by a HETEROCASTING workflow definition technique. The HETEROCASTING definition technique generally involves using a workflow definition with parameters to initiate heterogeneous workflow based on differences in the parameters. Therefore, the HETEROCASTING definition technique allows a distributed workflow not in parameters to be easily done (through a visual design tool) with parameters on nodes in a node group. There may be two primary workflow activities used to achieve this definition: a HETEROCAST split activity and a HETREOCAST linked activity. All the activities between divided HETEROCAST and HETEROCAST are put into parameters on the nodes of a node group to which these activities correspond.

Figure 10 is a diagram of an incorporation of the design of an inter-company workflow that includes putting parameters on groups. As shown, the flow of Work can start with a listening activity 70 waiting for an event. The activity 70 can be linked to the parallel activities 71 that link to a work sub-work 72 and a division of HTEROCAST 73. The work sub-work itself can include a workflow definition. With respect to HETEROCASTING, the workflow after the heterocast division 73 is done with parameters. Therefore, in the example of Figure 10, activity 74 is an activity with parameters. After activity 74, a joined heterocast 75 receives the flow of activity 74. The work sub-stream 72 and the joined heterocast 75 are linked to a synchronous or asynchronous link 76 which, in turn, links to an event integrated 77 (for example, multi-delivery). A type of workflow in Figure 10 can be designed using the present global collaboration designer and can allow a complete representation of the workflow for decision support between companies. This workflow can then be instantiated and implemented through the present global collaboration administrator.

Figure 11 is a diagram of an administration change incorporation by modifying a design of a workflow. As shown, an initial workflow design can have an event 70 linked to a parallel activity division 71. There can be, for example, two activities 78 between the activity division 71 and a union 76. This Workflow, once designed, can be instantiated and implemented using the global collaboration manager. If a change to the workflow is required, the global collaboration designer greatly alleviates the problem of making the change. For example, a new activity 79 can be added between division 71 and junction 76. The workflow can then be reinstated and implemented centrally.

In particular, the HETEROCA technique can allow the construction of distributed workflows and in parameters on nodes in a node group. This can allow a huge productivity gain over the design of individual workflows for members of individual groups.

In addition, this technique makes a rapid design and a prototype of workflows between sophisticated companies with hundreds or thousands of possible partners. The technique must be distinguished from "conventional multi-part" in which identical messages are sent to the various nodes (partners). In essence, multireparting allows a person to design a unique workflow that runs identically through multiple nodes. This differs from the heterorepair technique, where workflows run differently based on which node they are running.

A third important characteristic is the support for workflows based on distribution. The flows of work based on the distribution allow these work flows to be used specifically for generic deals. This capability allows the creation of generic or tempered workflows that can be instantiated in various scenarios. For example, the types of roles or distribution may be: partner roles, axle roles; radio group papers; network papers; network group papers; user roles. As an example of the roles or distributions, the roles of partners refer to the different roles or characters played by the partners. Therefore, a role of partner in the case of procurement is that of primary provider and secondary supplier.

Work-based workflows can lead to the concept of three different phases in the design and execution of a workflow. The design phase is the phase in which workflows based on distribution are defined. The phase of the instance is the phase in which the distributions are mapped to instances. For example, the primary provider can be mapped to a first company, and the PO approver can be mapped to John Doe. Third, the run-time phase may be the phase in which the workflow in instance runs.

An additional important feature is the integration of automated workflows with flows of work oriented by the user. Workflows can often be described as having two varieties: automated system-to-system workflows, and user interconnection workflows. Even though there are workflows that are fully automated, and there are workflows that are completely user-driven, most workflows have automated interconnection elements as well as user interconnection. The present global collaboration of administrator and designer does not require making this artificial distinction between the types of workflow. Therefore, workflows can be automated in parts and interact with users elsewhere. Both automated parts and user parts can span multiple companies.

Integration with the outside world Figure 12 is a diagram of an incorporation of the integration of a workflow with the outside world. As described in the previous section, inter and intra-company work flows can be closed. These workflows can be composed of activities inserted together in various configurations. There is no restriction on what different activities of the workflow can do, but one of the main tasks of these activities is to integrate with the outside world. Figure 12 shows how a Workflow can be integrated with the outside world using a 'bottom-up' approach to integration components. The components may include the accessories 80, the transformations 82, the transfer objects 84, the adapters and the flows 86.

The global collaboration manager can support a component-based integration model. The component-based integration model allows flexibility in structuring the integration. There can be two types of components: primitive components and composite components. The primitive components may include accessories 80, the transformers 82 and the transfer objects 84. The composite components include the adapters and the flows 86. The composite components are constructed in terms of primitive components. In this scheme, the accessories 80 are used to access an external source such as an SCP (SUPPLY CHAIN PLANNER), an SAP, a relative database, network servers, E-mail, message buses, etc. The accessories 80 can be used to read, write or listen to the sources and destinations of the data. Transformers 82 can be used to transform data from one form to another form. The transfer objects 84 are objects that can be passed from one activity to another activity or from company to company. The transfer objects 84 can optionally be converted to EDI, XML, CORBA structures, etc. The fittings 80 and the transformers 82 can be inserted together to form flows. A complete flow can be executed in a single activity as shown in Figure 13.

Figure 13 is a diagram of an incorporation of a data stream running in a single activity 92. As shown, a data source 90 can be accessible from and provide data to an accessor component 94. The accessor component 94 then it can pass data through the transformer components 96 and 98 which provide the data to a second accessor component 100. The data can then be stored in a data destination 102.

Figure 14 is a diagram of an incorporation of a data stream divided by multiple activities 104 and 106. As shown, the flow of Figure 14 differs from that of Figure 13 in the sense that the transformer components 96 and 98 are within separate activities 104 and 106 and are communicated by a transfer object. The data flows of multiple companies can be based on the model of Figure 14 rather than on that of Figure 13.

With respect to the transformations, in an incorporation, two types of transformation can be supported fundamental: transformations based on I2-CDM and direct transformations. Transformations based on I2-CDM are based on the common data model of technology 12 (CDM). The common data model is an abstract scheme that is available in both rational and object forms.

Figure 15 is a block diagram of an incorporation of a transformation model based on 12 -CDM. As shown, the transformers and accessors can be coupled to transform application data into a common data model data object 110 and vice versa. For example, a SUPPLY CHAIN PLANER (SCP) object can be created by a supply chain glider accessor from the supply chain glider data 114. A supply chain glider object 112 can then be transformed by a supply chain glider transformer-common data model in a common data model object 110. Similarly, an SAP 116 object can be created by an SAP accessor from SAP data 118. The SAP 116 object can then be transformed through a SAP-planned supply chain transformer in a common data model object 110. The SAP accessor and the transformer, as with other accessors and transformers can be combined into an SAP adapter-standard common data model 120 that can be used for transformations based on common data model of other components. As another example, a BAAN 122 object can be created by a BAAN accessor of the BAAN data 124. A BAAN object 122 can then be transformed into a CDM object 110 by a BAAN-CDM transformer. These transformers work in another direction too.

Figure 16 is a diagram of an embodiment of a direct transformation. In direct transformers, objects are converted from one form to another without passing through an intermediate format. For example, as shown in Figure 16, supply chain glider data (SCP) 130 can be accessed by a supply chain glider accessor to create a supply chain glider object 132. The supply chain glider 132 object can then be directly transformed into a FACTORY PLANER (FP) object 134. The factory glider object 134 can then be converted to the factory glider data 136 through a factory glider accessor.

This data flow can operate in the different direction as well.

In these processes, there are several levels of granules to which access and transformation can take place, including relationship levels (table), generic object (tree, graph, matrix, etc.) and specific object (material account, plan, etc.). .). Sometimes access can only be available at one level (say table) but the transformation may be more appropriate to any other level (say generic object). For example, the hierarchical aggregate (a form of transformation) is often appropriate over a tree object. However, the data can only be accessible in tabular form. In this case, for example, the data must be accessed at the tabular level, must be transformed into a tree and then have the hierarchical aggregate applied to them.

Figure 17 is a diagram of an incorporation of different levels of transformation and access. As shown, access and transformation can have three levels. A first level 140 may involve a table access and transformations. A second level 142 may involve transformations and access of a generic object (tree, graph, etc.) and a third level may involve transformations and access of a specific object (accumulation of materials, plan, etc.). In addition to the transformations between the application formats, there may also be transformations between the three levels as shown.

Development of Collaborations An important factor in a multi-company collaboration system is the ease with which collaboration can be deployed. As discussed, the present global collaboration manager can support four different types of company relations: axis to network, axis to radio, axis to axis and axis to-VAN-EDI. Of these four, the axis to network has all the characteristics of deployment of traditional network applications. The a-VAN-EDI axis can be deployed to the extent it levels an existing VAN-EDI infrastructure. Even though the relationship from axis to network is highly deployable, it may suffer from the problem of requiring a human on the network side of the relationship. In other words, it may not be suitable for a system-to-system collaboration.

The axis-to-radio solution can provide maximum deployment in the system-to-system collaboration environment. In the axis-to-radio field, the radio engine is analogous to the network explorer, and the radio portion of the collaboration is analogous to the network page or applet. Similar to a network page or applet, the radio part of the collaboration can be designed and deployed centrally to remote network engines. Unlike a network page or applet, there may still be integration that requires doing remotely. This remote integration may be inevitable but it can be circumscribed and defined precisely by the radio part of the collaboration.

Another aspect of the deployment is the version management. Collaborations once designed and deployed are feasible to require changes (in different ways) to the to pass the time. It may be important that the subsequent versions of the collaborations are easily deployable as initial versions. The current global collaboration administrator can provide full support for the versions and centralized redeployment of collaborations. In addition, the different versions of the collaborations can run simultaneously without impacting each other. This allows an existing version to be phased gracefully while another version is being phased.

Another element of the deployment of this global collaboration manager is the level of existing infrastructure. This element is evident. For example, in the support of the relationship of axis to radio on existing network protocols. Axis-to-radio support over existing network protocols can be important for rapid deployment since no modification or reconfiguration of an existing network infrastructure is required. The large time savings in this aspect can come from not having to carefully modify the firewall and the security infrastructures that may already be in place.

Support from Many to Many Collaborations The present radio-to-axis architecture provides easy handling and development. However, in the In practice, companies collaborate with many companies, which in turn collaborate with other companies. Therefore, companies often form a graph or collaborative network. This can be supported through the ability to replace an axle motor with a radio engine at any time. This substitution capacity allows many to many collaborative networks to be organically grown rather than all at once.

Figure 18 is a diagram of an embodiment of replacing a network engine with a radio engine within a collaboration. As shown, a company (El) can deploy a 150-axis motor on itself and a radio engine 152 on all partner sites. In particular, a radio engine 154 can be a partner site (E2). If the partner site (E2) wishes to design and control its own collaboration, it can replace the radio engine 154 with a shaft motor 156. From the perspective of the company 1, the company 2 can still be a radio in the collaboration of the company 1. However, this radio now runs on a shaft motor 156 which can control its own collaborations with the radio engines 158. In addition, the radio engines 160 and 162 can be associated with a third entity ( E3) that interacts with both the shaft motor 150 and the shaft motor 156 in the name of the company E3.

Extension of the Work Frame An important aspect of the present framework of work is its extension. Without extension, the work framework may not be able to handle new situations and challenges it confronts. There may be several different dimensions for this extension. For example, a primary area of extension is in the area of semantic object rules. If the standards supported are not sufficient for a particular problem, then the work framework can be augmented with new semantic standards. Additionally, the work framework allows the construction of proprietary semantic standards. In addition, the work frame can be extended by adding new accessors, transformers, adapters, etc. The standard component library can be extended both generally and by the end users.

Work Space Object Figure 19 is a block diagram of an incorporation of a computer workspace 200 into a computer system 205. The computer workspace 200 includes a plurality of memory slots 210 in communication with a permit work frame 220 and an event manager 230. The computer workspace 200 is accessed by the network nodes 240 through network 250. Generally, permit work frame 220 controls access to memory slots 210 within a computer workspace 200 by network nodes 240. Event manager 230 generates events for network nodes. 240 in response to the conditions associated with the data or objects that are stored in the memory slots 210.

Network 250 comprises any combination or number of axes, steers, bridges, gates, switches or any other association of suitable communication devices and related software that transmit data between network nodes 240. In one embodiment, network 250 comprises a network implemented independently or in relation to a wide area network (WAN) or a local area network (LAN), such as an Ethernet network, a sample ring network or a fiber-distributed data interconnection network (FDDI). Network 250 supports protocols without higher-level connections such as Internet Protocol (IP), higher-level connection oriented protocols such as the frame relay or any other suitable network work protocol. The 250 network can be used in a multi-company collaboration to implement workflows including activities that take place between or in between more than one company. Each work network node 240 of the work network 250 in a collaboration of multiple companies can be associated with a different company, allowing the communication and the coordinated operation of the activities and of work flows between companies.

The network nodes 240 can be any network endpoint, peripheral device, terminal, server, client, hub, radio or other device connected to the work network 250. Each work network node 240 is associated with a particular company . The network nodes 240 may or may not participate in a particular workflow, activity or other process. Network nodes 240 can access workspace 200 as part of a workflow or collaboration or as part of other activities or processes not associated with a workflow or collaboration.

Each memory slot 210 can store data and objects. As used here, each of the means of at least one subset of the items identified. The objects can be Java objects, C ++ objects, CORBA objects, or other structures that may be able to store both information and behavior. The memory slots 210 can be any memory structure, either accessed in queue or randomly, capable of retaining data or objects. The memory slots 210 may include, for example, any data structure, a memory array. The memory slots 210 may, for example, contain a plurality of objects queued within the memory slots 210 or may contain only a single object.

The memory slots 210 can be stored on a disk u Another storage medium ro can be maintained in a memory during any process or activities carried out by the computer system 205. The memory slots 210 held in the memory can be stored in a random access memory, for example, by increasing the speed at which its contents are accessed over the memory slots 210 that can be stored in a disk or peripheral component. Many memory slots 210 that are stored on a disk or other storage means are accessible at a lower storage media speed than the memory slots 210 so that they are stored in a memory, but as such they are not volatile allowing the storage of data or persistent objects. Many memory slots 210 may be arranged in an organization hierarchy defined by a programmer, user, or other suitable mechanism. Such a hierarchy allows easy categorization of and reference to memory slots 210 as described below with reference to Figure 20.

The permission frame 210 maintains and controls access to the memory slots 210. The permission frame 220 may include any combination of apparatus and software capable of maintaining access rights to the memory slots 210 and of controlling access to the memory slots 210. 210 slots based on the access rights maintained. In an embodiment, access rights include the right of a node to read from the contents of each of the memory slots 210, to write to the contents of each of the memory slots 210, to remove any of the contents of each of the memory slots 210 and to subscribe and not to subscribe to any notification of event for one or more specified memory slots 210.

The event manager 230 generates events for the nodes 240 in response to a particular modification within the memory slots 210. The event manager 230 may include any combination of devices and software capable of generating events and initiating the address of such events. events to a particular network node 240 or to another suitable element of the computer system 205. The network nodes 240 having access rights to subscribe to an event notification for a particular memory slot 210, as determined by the frame of permission 220, and that exercise such a subscription to the particular memory slot 210 are notified of any event generated by the event manager 230 each time a notification requiring the modification that is related to the particular memory slot 210 occurs.

For example, one of the network nodes 240 may have access rights to subscribe to the notification to a particular memory slot 210 as verified by the table of permission 220, and can subscribe to the notification for the particular memory slot 210 each time the particular memory slot 210 is written by one of the network nodes 240. Until one of the network nodes 240 descrambles the notification for that particular slot, whenever the particular memory slot 210 is written by one of the network nodes 240, the message manager 230 will generate a message and initiate the routing of such message to one of the network nodes 240 indicating that the particular memory slot 210 has received writing.

In one embodiment, the access rights for the subscription and non-subscription to the event notification for a particular memory slot 210 may be based upon the plasticization of an event. For example, a particular network node 240 may have subscription rights to be notified when a particular memory slot 210 has data removed but not when the same memory slot 210 has been written to it, or the particular network node 240 may have have subscription rights to both or subscription by covering the notification in response to either data being removed or written in such memory slot 210. The access rights granted by the permissibility of the work frame 220 and the subscription to messages from the event manager 230 can also be maintained in any suitable combination. For example, the notification of events can be subscribed to a individual memory slot 210, all memory slots 210 or a sub-game of memory slots 210 selected on an indicated criterion. Similarly, access rights can be devised by a permissibility frame 220 to all memory slots 210 or any subgame thereof.

Figure 20 illustrates an embodiment of the workspace illustrated in Figure 19. Workspace 300 is a workspace for storing data and objects in memory slots 310 that are arranged in a hierarchical box. The exact nature of the hierarchy and the placement of the particular memory slots 310 within the work box is definable by a workspace administrator, another user or any suitable mechanism.

Generally, a workspace 300 is organized into sections 305 that are furthermore separated into individual memory slots 310 and groups 320. The groups 320 may in turn contain memory slots 310 and / or be separated into additional subgroups. In Figure 20, the memory slots 310 are designed by section number, group number or subgroup number that is applicable, and then are designed by s and an identification number within the applicable section 305 or within the group 320. For example, the memory slot 310 identified with the nomenclature "section 2.grupol.s2" denotes that the second slot in group 1 of section 2 of the workspace. The slot can be in sequence. Another hierarchy or organization scheme can be replaced by the hierarchy described here. A hierarchy such as the one described allows easy categorization and grouping of memory slots 310. Such categorization can be used to easily categorize memory slots 310 for the purposes of maintaining access rights. For example, a network node 240 of Figure 19 can only be granted a particular access right to a specific row of memory slots 310. Such a row can be all memory slots 310 at the group level, for example, such such as memory slots 310 designated by section l.sl and section, section 2. if in Figure 19. Access rights can also be granted to a particular section 305, to group 320, to the subgroup, or to a combination thereof.

Although the present invention has been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations can be made thereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.

Claims (29)

R E I V I N D I C A C I O N S

1. A computer workspace that includes: a plurality of memory slots, the memory slots each being operable to store at least one object; a permission work frame in communication with the plurality of memory slots, the permission work frame maintains access rights to each memory slot; Y an event manager in communication with the plurality of memory slots and the permission box, the event manager being operable to generate an event in response to the memory slots that are being modified based on the access rights maintained by the table of permission.

2. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that the memory slots are arranged in a hierarchical format.

3. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that one of ^^ ¡^ ¿sn ^ the memory slots is kept in memory.

4. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that the workspace of the computer is in communication with a computer network and wherein the message is operable to be sent to at least one node of the computer. net.

5. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that the workspace of the computer is in communication with a computer network and a plurality of nodes of the network are operable for each to generate a written instruction, the written instruction writes data to at least one of the memory slots, and wherein the event manager is operable to generate an event in response to the data being written to one of the memory slots.

6. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that at least one of the memory slots is a memory queue.

7. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that at least one of the memory slots is an adjustable one.

8. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that at least one of the memory slots is a persistent memory slot.

9. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 1 characterized in that the computer workspace is in communication with a computer network having a plurality of nodes and wherein the permission frame includes access controls that control access to the memory slots for each of the nodes.

10. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 9, characterized in that the permission frame includes access controls that control the right of each of the plurality of nodes to read and write from the memory slots.

11. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 9, characterized in that the permission frame includes access controls that control the right of each of the plurality of nodes to remove data from the memory slots.

12. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 9 characterized in that the Permission box includes access controls that control the right of each node to subscribe and not to subscribe the event generated by the event manager.

13. A computer workspace operable to communicate with a plurality of companies on a network, comprising: a plurality of memory slots, the memory slots each being operable to store at least one object; a permission frame in communication with the computer workspace, the permit work frame maintains access rights to each memory slot for the plurality of companies; Y an event manager in communication with the plurality of memory slots and the permission box, the event manager is operable to generate an event to send to the plurality of companies, the event being generated in response to a memory slot that is being modified based on the access rights maintained by the permission workframe.

14. The computer workspace such and as claimed in clause 13 characterized in that the memory slots are arranged in a hierarchical format.

15. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13, characterized in that the memory slots are kept in a memory.

16. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13 characterized in that the event manager is operable to generate an event in response to data being written to one of the memory slots by one of the plurality of the companies .

17. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13, characterized in that at least one of the memory slots is a persistent memory slot.

18. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13, characterized in that the permit work table includes access controls that control access to the memory slots by each of the plurality of companies.

19. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13 characterized in that the Permission work box includes access controls that control the right to each of the plurality of companies to read and write from memory slots.

20. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13, characterized in that the permission work table includes access controls that control the right of each one of the plurality of companies to remove data from the memory slots.

21. The computer workspace as claimed in clause 13, characterized in that the permit work table includes access controls that control the right of each of the plurality of companies to subscribe and not subscribe to the messages generated by the event manager.

22. A computer system for a multi-company collaboration that includes: a workspace that has a plurality of stored objects; a first node associated with a first company, the first node being in communication with the workspace, the first node makes contact with a first activity of a workflow, the first activity includes accessing one of the plurality of storage objects; a second node associated with a second company, the second node is in communication with the workspace, the second node conducts a second activity of the workflow, the second activity includes accessing one of the plurality of stored objects; Y wherein at least one of the stored objects is kept in memory during the activities.

23. The computer system as claimed in clause 22 characterized in that the workspace includes a plurality of memory slots each operable to store at least one object.

24. The computer system as claimed in clause 23 characterized in that the memory slots are arranged in a hierarchical format defined by a user.

25. The computer system as claimed in clause 23 characterized in that the workspace includes a permission frame.

26. The computer system as claimed in clause 25 characterized in that the permit work frame is in communication with the first and second nodes and wherein the permission network includes access controls that control the access rights to and so on. less than the memory slots for each of the first and second nodes.

27. The computer system as claimed in clause 22 characterized in that the workspace includes an event manager, the event manager is in communication with the first and second nodes, the event manager is operable to generate events to send the first and second nodes.

28. The computer system as claimed in clause 27 characterized in that the first and second nodes are operable to generate written instructions, the written instructions are operable to write data to the workspace, and where the message manager is operable to generate events in response to the data that is being written to the workspace, the event manager is operable to send the events to the first and second nodes.

29. The computer system as claimed in clause 28 characterized in that the space of work includes a permission box, the permission box controls the sending of messages to the first and second nodes. SUMMARIZES A computer workspace comprising a plurality of memory slots, the memory slots each being operable to store at least one object. The computer workspace also includes a permission frame in communication with the computer workspace, the permission work box maintains access rights to each memory slot. The computer workspace also includes an event manager in communication with the memory slots and the permission work box, the event manager is operable to generate messages in response to the memory slots that are being accessed and also in response to access rights maintained by the permit work table.