Re: Representation Types Alternatives - Or Should Discussion be Tabled?

["William J. Kammerer" <wkammerer@foresightcorp.com>]

Stuart Campbell and Mike Rawlins agree that it's a minor issue whether
underlying code sets and standards ebXML is dependent upon are free, and
that such discussion can be deferred. Apparently it only detracts from
discussions on representation types, which Mike thinks "is a fundamental
issue that needs to be resolved in whatever is approved for Vienna."

Perhaps discussion on free codes should not be carried on under the
subject of "Representation Types Alternatives," which is why I renamed
it "Dear Prudence:  Do I have to pay for codes??"

But both threads can be carried on concurrently without causing
overload. The topic was important to Todd Boyle and Dave Welsh.  I think
Messrs. Boyle and Welsh may be worrying too much about "free" standards.
But nevertheless, simple courtesy should be extended our colleagues so
they aren't the least hesitant in broaching subjects germane to
e-business standards and core components.

Calls for tabling discussion, though, sometime provide valuable insight
into where the ebXML specifications are headed.  I can remember demands
that discussion re: SOAP be terminated forthwith on the TR&P list - and
lo and behold, we end up surprised by SOAP at Vancouver!.  The same
thing happened with UDDI, where all discussion of the subject was tabled
in Reg Rep - so I suspect the ebXML Registry will incorporate UDDI real
soon, to be fobbed on us by surprise at Vienna.

Though there is never enough bandwidth or mailbox space to accommodate
UDDI or SOAP (or Dave's and Todd's questions on "free" standards),
there's plenty to go around for the chit  chat which would better be
handled by phone or private e-mail:  my all time favorite is at
http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-transport/200104/msg00001.html.

William J. Kammerer
FORESIGHT Corp.
4950 Blazer Pkwy.
Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305
+1 614 791-1600

Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/
"accelerating time-to-trade"