Re: [ebxml-dev] Microsoft Refuses to support ebXML

[Ulrich Staudinger <chicago5@gmx.de>]

So i directly comment to your quoted text. 


> --- Text from ebXML section follows (its quite short) :-
> 
> ebXML arose from the EDI community in an effort to reduce costs EDI by
> using 
> the Internet in place of expensive VANs.

true, afaik. 

> 
> ebXML is an international initiative established by UN/CEFACT (United 
> Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation) and OASIS (Organization for the 
> Advancement of Structured Information Standards).

established and sponsored, afaik.

> ebXML is an open standard XML business specification that enables XML to
> be 
> used in a consistent manner for the exchange of all electronic business 
> data. The phase 1 spec was published in May 2001.  Late in the drafting 
> cycle, ebXML adopted SOAP + attachments as it’s transport.

soap is used as an example in the messaging specification, however, email or
http are used as examples as well. 

> EbXML has a business process information model (BPIM) and uses UML and UMM
> for process modelling.
> 
> The primary objective of ebXML is to lower the barrier to entry to 
> electronic business in order to facilitate trade, particularly with
> respect 
> to small businesses and developing nations.

imo, primary objective of ebxml is to enable trade not only with small
businesses and developing nations but with all sort of businesses, and i think the
primary objective is to use xml technology to enable the use of xml-enabled
components like xml routers and so on. 
 
> The ebXML Transport Routing and Packaging specification released February 
> 2002, provided support for SOAP 1.1.
> 
> There is huge overlap between the technologies used by ebXML and SOAP,
> WSDL 
> and UDDI.  However the goals of ebXML are more ambitious based as it is on
> standardising business processes.  This may prove to be it’s undoing as 
> companies tend to have different business processes and generally do not 
> change them without very good economic justification.


> While most of the industry is aligned behind SOAP, WSDL and UDDI, only Sun
> 
> is championing ebXML while Microsoft refuses to support it.

As said, as ebxml is not a transport mechanism (like soap) but a content
description, these two definitely can't be mixed or compared. 

> There is considerable momentum behind the SOAP, WSDL, UDDI camp and new 
> standards are emerging all the time.  For instance Business Process 
> Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS) specification was released 
> recently with the aim of replacing IBM’s Web Services Flow Language (WSFL)
> 
> and Microsoft’s XLANG.
> 
> Another view of ebXML is that it is a top down approach whereas SOAP is a 
> bottom up approach.  The consensus view seems to be that lightweight 
> approach adopted by SOAP is more likely to achieve critical mass across
> the 
> industry and that it will quickly add the superior features of ebXML. 
> SOAP 
> + attachments is therefore the recommended approach for xxx.

if you deliver ebxml within the soap attachment, it comes out to what i said
above. 

What the text misses: ebxml is much more than just a content description. it
is also a specification how-to analyse a business process, how-to adopt a
business process and much more (i.e. process repository). 


my two cent,
ulrich

-- 
Ulrich Staudinger http://www.die-horde.de http://www.igpp.de 
JID: uls@jabber.org