RE: ebXML glossary

[Stuart Campbell <stuart.campbell@tieglobal.com>]

Re - Definition of 'Infrastructure' correspondence

 

This raises an important question...there appear to be two basic sides to the output of ebXML. 

- BP/CC activities - so called content

- Non BP/CC - what most call infrastructure (even if the glossary doesnt)

 

However, my belief is that it is not this sort of split (CC/BP vs non CC/BP) which is important.  The split which i believe is important is:

 

- Specifications for the whole of ebXML

- Content which is built by using the specifications (in reality this means BP (process catalogues) and CC (Core component catalogues))

 

The difference with the top view is that BP/CC activities also contain specifications and the development of these specifications are interlinked with other ebXML specifications and it would be illogical to split the two up.  Splitting away the content is far easier to boundary.

 

Thus, in conjunction with the 'where next' discussion...this logic would suggest that all specifications, guidance material etc would logically go to OASIS, and the content/catalogues which related to these specifications is performed by EWG+.  The main difference is that the EWG would not be responsible for BP/CC specifications themselves.

 

 

Regards

 

 

STUART


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Campbell
Technical Strategy Director, TIE Holding NV
UK Office    T:+44 1270 254019   F:+44 7971 121013
Netherlands  T:+31 20 658 9335   F:+31 20 658 9901
Global       M:+44 7970 429251   E:stuart.campbell@TIEGlobal.com
                 W:www.TIEglobal.com P:www.stuartcampbell.co.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: agrangard@nycall.com [mailto:anders.grangard@edifrance.org]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 14:27
To: Lynne Rosenthal; ebXML-Architecture List
Subject: Re: ebXML glossary

The term ebXML Infrastructure has been used with different meanings within ebXML. We decided in Vancouver to stick with the interpretation of the TA specification, i.e. meaning the entire framework. If we feel we need to distinguish between the BOV and FSV views, we should either use these terms or come up with new ones.

 

Anders

----- Original Message -----

From: Lynne Rosenthal

To: ebXML-Architecture List

Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 1:29 PM

Subject: Re: ebXML glossary

It probably should be noted, that the definition for ebXML Infrastructure is not consistent with the way it was used during  the Thursday meeting (in Vancouver) regarding the future of ebXML.  At that meeting, Infrastructure was used to indicate those ebXML specifications that would probably go under OASIS - that is, Reg/Rep, TRP, and Trading Partners.   The current glossary definition states that the Infrastructure is ALL the specifications.

Lynne


At 01:04 PM 2/22/01 +0100, agrangard@nycall.com wrote:

Content-type: text/plain
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ridley.nist.gov id f1MCE8B02801

Attached you will find the updated ebXML glossary to be voted at the next
steering committee conference call.


Anders Grangard
Edifrance
Ingénieur - Consultant en Commerce électronique
Tel: +33 (0)1 42 91 62 24
http://www.edifrance.org