ebXML in W3C? (was) Re: 2 July BP meeting notes and 16 July BPmeeting notice

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@mmiec.com>]

>Karsten Riemer <Karsten.Riemer@Sun.COM> on 07/03/2001 08:48:51 AM:
>
>The question is to Jamie: Did you mean that UN/CEFACT should submit BPSS 
>to W3C?


>Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 09:27:02 -0700
>From: Scott Hinkelman <srh@us.ibm.com>
>
>Is UN/CEFACT a member of W3C?

I don't know the answer to either question.  But I would like to.  If  the 
ebXML work product is going to survive (versus being incorporated into 
someone else's stuff), does it -need- to be submitted?   Actually, Scott, 
it was IBM's WSFL submission that tipped me off to thinking about whether 
W3C is in, and will become the real arbiter of, this space.

I think this is a topic that needs wider discussion.  Certainly, 
some   intelligent outsiders and would-be users have -asked- why ebXML is 
not before W3C.  (Along the lines of, "if not, why should I take this 
seriously?")   I  would like to have an answer for public use, because my 
alternatives currently are "they forgot", "they never planned to" or 
"they're not telling".  None of these are optimal.   A continuing 
ecological concern for ebXML work is whether participants are contributing 
to a standard, or simply doing R&D for future products.  So I imagine the 
new leadership, if and when it emerges, will need to address how the 
standard is being managed vis-a-vis other standards.

Can anyone enlighten me on whether W3C submission was discussed prior to or 
at Vienna?

Best regards   Jamie

James Bryce Clark
VP and General Counsel
McLure Moynihan Inc.
Chair, ABA Business Law Subcommittee on Electronic Commerce
jamie.clark@mmiec.com, jbc@lawyer.com
1 818 597 9475