Re: ebXML in W3C?

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

At 05:09 AM 7/9/01, you wrote:
>>Jamie, Regarding your comment, --and just to be clear to everyone, * * *
>>We have not submitted WSFL anywhere as of this email. It is purely and IBM
>>specification.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Scott Hinkelman, Senior Software Engineer
>>XML Industry Enablement
>>IBM e-business Standards Strategy

Thanks Scott.  I will go back and figure out what to make of the reports I 
read.  The broader point was not about IBM at all, but about where (if 
anywhere) ebXML belongs in the firmament of standards.  I've heard from 
several other people off-line.  Here's a rough synthesis:
1.   There is certainly some user-level interest in how, if it all, ebXML 
fits into the W3C schema.
2.    Some parts of the ebXML domain seem to be within W3C's self-defined 
domain.  E.g., the ebXML transport uses SOAP; W3C has a SOAP submission.
3.    It may be too early to say whether web services, generally, are 
within the W3C domain.  There may prove to be overlap between the business 
functionalities offered by web services and those offered by ebXML business 
processes.  But that's speculation.
4.   At one time it seemed that W3C would not specify/endorse tag 
taxonomies within the broader XML standard.  Let a thousand flowers bloom, 
so to speak.  Will W3C will continue to stay out of the tag-specification 
/business object /business process domain?  This is becoming less clear.
5.   If that state of affairs changes, it would be unfortunate for the 
success of the ebXML open model if proprietary submissions make it to the 
table and ebXML does not.
6.   The foregoing concerns properly belong to the new standards management 
group that OASIS and CEFACT may yet form.   Personally I am hoping CEFACT 
and OASIS will roll out something soon that gives evidence of being 
properly attentive to those issues.

Best regards    Jamie