Information from the 2/24 RegRep Telecon

[srh@us.ibm.com]

ebXML Architects,
The Registry/Repository work group held a 2/24 telecon.
11 ebXML participants where on the call. There are 127 people
on the Registry listserv. Following are the main points discussed:

The Registry ebXML 'private pages' are at
http://www.ebxml.org/working/project_teams/registry/
Much of the current information is available there.
Also, the current UML Registry model work is available in multiple formats
at:
http://ObjectRepository.NorstanConsulting.com/

UML modeling and XMI technology:
- There are two perspectives on the utilization of XMI. 1)toward UML models
encoded in XMI for Repository storage (leveraging a neutral-file meta model
format), and 2) DTD/Schema generation of software 'components' from XMI
via XMI production rules.
- XMI's design has been focused primarily to facilitate UML model exchange.
Given that, T.Allen has constructed a detail XMI review paper pointing out
problems and looseness in the current XMI technology in respect to
DTD/Schema generation.
(I back up Terry's findings from my own experience with Rose2K, XMI
exporter,
and DTD mappings, working with some of our internal UML).
- There is concern with the current XMI technology in this light;
discussion on alternatives
including writing alternate mappings to DTD; DTD vrs XML Schema timing;
and thinking of a backup approach due to schedule pressure of overall
ebXML.
- As with many groups, Registry desires accelerated XML Schema schedule
from W3C. Conclusion is to move forward around this issue and focus where
progress can be made such as in use cases for the Registry.

Work plan / time line / schedule:
- Awareness that the 'outside world' may be under the impression that
the ebXML effort will be slow; a Gartner Group report has been distributed
to this effect. Some perceived this report as non-justified.
- There is concern over resource effort from volunteers on Registry effort
and aggressiveness needed to negate the Gartner perspective, and
of deliverables have been pushed near the end of ebXML initiative.
- Much discussion on obtaining review of the Registry UML model underway
and how
to break up this work effort. Discussion on possibility of flow-charting
via UML activity
diagrams, and if this may make it easier to capture workflows and key
aspects of the system
across the group. The group has concluded that any format of workflow
scenarios
is workable to start the effort.
- The group will put use case prose on the web site for the identified
Orlando use cases,
and then proceed to further define the cases through sub-division across
the group.
This will help form the functional requirements document for Registry.

XML.org effort:
- The ebXML Registry effort will be 'in line with' OASIS using 3 use cases:
Submission, Classification, and Retrieval (less clear currently on
Classification).
-  Discussion on submission approach, and search criteria in context of
business
profiles. T. Allen suggests a 'services' provision approach on search.
The question surfaces if this is something being considered in ebXML, and
requested to be
addressed by ebXML Architecture. The Registry group has embraced the
Eco Framework registry types at this point and feels discovery of Trading
Partners
and there services should be facilitated, and should be
addressed in the overall architecture space.

Thanks,
Scott R. Hinkelman
IBM Austin
Architecture and Development, Industry XML/Java Standards
Office: 512-823-8097 TL793-8097
Home: 512-930-5675
Cell: 512-940-0519
srh@us.ibm.com
Fax: 512-838-1074