Re: [ebxml-dev] ebXML specifications interdendancies

[Duane Nickull <duane@xmlglobal.com>]

Some comments inline:

Todd Boyle wrote:

> That's fine but then, defining the allowable Contexts becomes
> a hugely important economic and political question.  Just as are
> the core components themselves.  But there's no sufficient process
> for dialog on either one!<SNIP>  
>>>>>>>>>>>
Todd:

There definately should be.  What I envision as the best route forward
is to have a "lookup table" in the registry which can build a Context
Rules message that contains an ID based on the tables.  This may require
a code list with enumerated values and allowable deriviations.  It is a
*huge* job and will likely not be done overnight.

> 
> For example, I posted my viewpoint more than once here, that
> internal application integration is a context, of which accounting
> integration is a sub class.  Nobody reacted at all.  No dialog.
> Maybe my idea is wrong; maybe it fits under the "Legacy Systems"
> context... but I couldn't quite get it.
>>>>>>>>>>
and this represents just one of the simpler use cases.
 
> Please don't mistake my comments as negative, I think ebXML
> is the greatest thing to come along in ages, and grateful for
> everything that has been produced so far!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ebXML needs forward thinkers like yourself to start he process of what
is next.  Only by attempting integration can we find all the "gotchas"
that theoretical work cannot uncover.  I view your  comments as a step
forward.
 
Duane Nickull
-- 
CTO, XML Global Technologies
****************************
Transformation - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/foundation/
ebXML Central - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/central/