[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group
Eric, Agreed on your thoughts on convergence and single standard. I would modify it to a set of standards. Also I see your point to put all the efforts under the ebXML - kind of branding. I would look for leverage rather than convergence. W3C is a mighty fine standard, and of course has a lot of influence. It comes from being a horizontal standards body providing fundamental technology directions. We should not turn it into a vertical as well. That is where IMHO, OASIS comes in the picture - set of vertical standards in various domains based on the fundamentals from W3C. You are right, W3C is an international standard and in almost all the groups I was in, there are folks from all over the world. cheers |-----Original Message----- |From: Eric Newcomer [mailto:eric.newcomer@iona.com] |Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 7:18 AM |To: Krishna Sankar; business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group | | |It would be good to promote BTP to W3C along with ebXML and RosettaNet |requirements to improve market traction and acceptance. The |more we can do to |promote convergence on a single set of standards, the better |chance we have of |widespread adoption of the work. In my opinion W3C still is the most |influential standards setting organization for the Web -- and despite the |comments from our colleage at BT, it's not U.S. based but |international, with |sponsorship in Europe through Inria and similar sponsorship in Japan. | |Eric | |-----Original Message----- |From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com] |Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 9:39 AM |To: business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org |Subject: FW: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group | | | |FYI |-----Original Message----- |From: Bob Haugen [mailto:linkage@interaccess.com] |Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:02 AM |To: 'Krishna Sankar'; ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org |Cc: business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group | | |The ebXML BPSS and UN/CEFACT UMM also have a |transaction protocol and transaction patterns. It is also |the same as the RosettaNet transaction protocol, and |the lower-level business signals that enable the transaction |protocol are also embedded in the ebXML Message Service. |The transaction patterns are declarative. I suspect the |reason even ebXML people don't recognize this is that |they have focused on the procedural choreography aspects |of the BPSS. | |So I think there is a possibility of a major conflict, although |I have not read the BTP protocol. | |-Bob Haugen | |P.S. I probably can't successfully post to the Oasis BT list, |so Krishna, maybe you can forward this message. | |-----Original Message----- |From: Krishna Sankar [SMTP:ksankar@cisco.com] |Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 1:15 AM |To: tony.am.fletcher@bt.com; ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org |Cc: business-transaction@lists.oasis-open.org |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group | |Tony/James, | | Haven't seen any takers on this. So let me take a first |stab at it. Here it |goes: | | The BTP TC has very focused charter - to develop XML based |*protocol* for |long lasting transactions across different enterprises over the |internet. I |don't see any conflict with the BTP and the ebXML Business Processes. In |fact, I think the BTP will compliment and complement (:-)) and make it |easier for the ebXML business process (in the areas of trx across the |internet). | | just my 1c (lost the other c in the market :-( in case anybody is |wondering) | | What are other views ? Also, what exactly is the overlap ? |I haven't seen |the MOU. Is it available on the web or can someone send me a copy ? | |cheers & hope you all had a productive July 4th | | | |-----Original Message----- | |From: tony.am.fletcher@bt.com [mailto:tony.am.fletcher@bt.com] | |Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 7:37 AM | |To: ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org | |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? and OASIS Business Transaction group | | | | | |Dear All, | | | |submit BPSS to W3C? | | | |Seems rather funny to me. UN/CEFACT is an arm of the United | |Nations and you | |can't get much more international than that, can you? For all | |the good work | |that it has done, at the end of the day W3C is a US based |not-for-profit | |organisation. I agree however that there is a practical challenge for | |UN/CEFACT to produce output that commands the status at least | |that accorded | |to W3C outputs. I also agree with a perception mentioned |below that the | |W3C, up till now at least, has been seen as tackling the more |the syntax | |issues, whereas OASIS and other organisations have tackled the | |application | |of those syntaxes. The messaging (protocol) area is clearly |a grey one | |where W3C may have a role to play. However, I would have |thought that in | |the business process area UN/CEFACT and OASIS should be able to | |stand-alone | |under the banner of ebXML. | | | |Talking of OASIS, I noticed with concern, the post from James |Bryce Clark | |that indicated that OASIS has started up its own new TC on business | |transactions. I would appreciate it if someone would clarify |rationale | |behind this, else I hope that OASIS will immediately close |this group and | |direct the participants to the ebXML business process group |instead. If | |there is not a clear statement or swift action from OASIS people | |will wonder | |what the value of the MoU is. | | | |Best Regards Tony | | | |A. M. Fletcher | |BTexact Technologies | | 01473 644526 +44 1473 644526 m +44 (0) 7740 739490 | | Fax: +44 | |(0) 1473 646291 | | Callisto House /261/pp46 (B81-MH), Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath, | |Ipswich IP5 3RE UK | | tony.am.fletcher@bt.com | | | |British Telecommunications plc | |Registered Office - 81 Newgate Street, London, EC1A 7AJ | |Registered in England no 1800000 | | | |This electronic message contains information from British | |Telecommunications | |plc which may be privileged or confidential. The information is | |intended to | |be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If |you are not | |the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, | |distribution | |or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have | |received this electronic message in error, please notify us by | |telephone or | |email (to the numbers or address above) immediately. | | | | | |-----Original Message----- | |From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com] | |Sent: 03 July 2001 23:31 | |To: ebxml-bp@lists.ebxml.org | |Subject: RE: ebXML in W3C? (was) Re: 2 July BP meeting notes |and 16 July | |BP meeting notice | | | | | |Hi all, | | | | From what I know and hear and talk, W3C is more fundamental in | |nature and | |OASIS is more "application" oriented. XML, Encryption, |DSIG,.. all fit in | |the W3C bucket. But things like registry, business process, | |ebXML fit in the | |OASIS bucket. Of course, there are always exceptions. | | | | IMHO, OASIS should be arbitrator on things like WSFL, registries, | |... And | |like James pointed out, OASIS should establish a |relationship/precedence | |work with W3C. And yes, it would be a shame if ebXML ends up as | |preliminary | |work/science projects towards other standards which cannibalize | |and nibble | |ebXML away :-( | | | | just my 1c | | | |cheers | | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------ | |To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word | |"unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-bp-request@lists.ebxml.org | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------ |To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word |"unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-bp-request@lists.ebxml.org | | |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC