Re: ebXML vs Rosettanet

[bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

> One of RosettaNets strengths is in developing vertical business process
> standards in various business domain areas. Their PIPs are very complete,
> and well thought out. ebXML does not really go into this space. ebXML does
> not go into the specification of what standards if any, the
> payloads/attachments need to conform to. It is upto either a standards
body
> (maybe rosettanet ), or the 2 (or more, in the case of multipart
> collaborations) business parties to decide for eg, what schemas etc the
XML
> payloads need to conform to etc.
>
> One of the similarities I have heard of, is that the meta-metamodel upon
> which the 2 specifications are based is the same, and has become part of
the
> UN/CEFACT TMWG UMM.

That is roughly correct:  the UMM metamodel was initially developed
by Edifecs Commerce for RosettaNet, and then Edifecs did a version 2,
and donated it to UN/CEFACT where it became the metamodel for
ebXML business processes.

RosettaNet is now planning to adopt ebXML BPSS for their next
version, so the wheel turns around again.  In other words, the two
organizations are intimately related.  And RosettaNet has some
of the most-real experience using XML in B2B ecommerce.

-Bob Haugen