RE: Conformance and naming

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by "Lynne S. Rosenthal"
> 
Hello All

Conformance is an important topic and it is important that we all have the
same basic understanding of what conformance is, what the issues that need
to be addressed are, etc.  From previous discussions, it seems that the TA
spec should address the overall ebXML conformance as well as the general
principles that each of the specifications should follow.  

NIST has been involved in developing conformance statements in various
specifications as well as developing other conformance related products
(e.g., test suites and test procedures).  Mark Skall and I have volunteered
to present a discussion on conformance at the Tokyo plenary.  If we aren't
on the plenary agenda, we would gladly present and lead a conformance
discussion during the week, inviting all who are interested (how would that
be arranged).  Additionally, both Mark and I are willing to meet with any
of the working groups to discuss the conformance clause and issues for
their specification. 

Regards
Lynne Rosenthal
Conformance Testing Group
NIST 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Lynne,

From my view point - the key areas here are the interfaces - the TRP and
RegRep 
ones, and the internal representation of the metamodel therein with a 
consistent reference system (UID's in the TA doc).

Provided two systems can effectively interchange, and that the information
has
a consistent information model - it will work.

These are the areas I see that NIST led work would be valuable - but we are

not quite there yet in being able to exactly specify all this -
probably post-Vancouver will be when this is stable.

At least right now NIST can help collect the metrics required and generally
organize this so once we have the detail - we can quickly integrate this
into
a sensible 'Implementors Guide'.

Are these the right thoughts?

Thanks, DW.