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

[Todd Boyle <tboyle@rosehill.net>]

> Messrs. Boyle and Welsh may be worrying too much about "free" standards.
> But nevertheless, simple courtesy should be extended our colleagues...

Don't worry about me.  Each of us make our sovereign decisions. 
I'm going where the product codes and the metadata are free. 

The business community sooner or later will realize that nickel
and diming the SME for XML schemas and subscription fees to
registries, fees for product lists, etc. they are alienating 10% 
or 30% or whatever portion of the SME market, and realize it isn't 
worth the cost.  

Consider this scenario.
- 80% of SMEs have no problem with fees, and 
- 80% have no problem with an upgrade to their XML parser, and
- 80% are not too worried about privacy,
- 80% have no problem with additional tax scrutiny, 
- 80% can get a grip on their internal security, etc.

then we're down to 32% adoption.  

ebXML adoption is a very, very large, slow-moving dynamic system 
which is very predictable, and is predicted by quantifiable factors.

Removing the fees from the metadata is a lot easier than changing 
some of the other problems.  If we had our Linus Torvalds or our
Dee Hock, he would jawbone those actors, within the community, 
whose actions are impeding overall adoption, and encourage behavior
that enhances the adoption.  This applies on standards for privacy
of registries, legal and ethical behaviors, as well as removal
of customer choice, achieving lock-in or lock-out of their customers
by partial support of ebXML, achieving dominance by embrace-and-
extend, as argued in the Java lawsuit, etc.  We don't need those
kinds of behaviors.   There should be somebody who cares enough
about ebXML adoption to argue these issues.

Respectfully,

Todd