Why isn't Core Components an ebXML Specification?

[Todd Boyle <tboyle@rosehill.net>]

Why are the Core Components technologies called "Reports"?
There is not a single piece of the entire Core Components 
work products listed in the "Specifications".
http://www.ebxml.org/specs/index.htm

The press release is:
http://www.ebxml.org/news/pr_20010514.htm


Was this a problem of incompleteness and quality, or did the 
governing executives OASIS and UN/CEFACT see a systematic problem
or flaw in the whole approach?  

Is there a better, competing technology?  

Was the competing school of thought based on emerging technologies,
or based on backward compatibility issues?   What are the key
factors that prevented any consensus to approve Core Components 
as a specification ?  Language or national differences?  Were 
dependencies on particular software vendors discovered in the spec?

The answers to these questions are important to future work
and the architecture decisions of many organizations outside
of ebXML.  Many of us will appreciate it if executives of ebXML
or its governing OASIS or UN/CEFACT will have the courage to
address these issues in writing -- or -- have they already 
done that, someplace?

Todd