[ebxml-dev] Re: ebXML doubts

[Fraser Goffin <goffinf@hotmail.com>]

Susan,

I have been evangelising the use of ebXML MS for about 2 years within my own 
organisation. Last year Dick Brooks and Ian Jones were kind enough to come 
along and present to a reasonably large group of internal IT and business 
user staff.

I may not have explained it all that well in my initial note but I have 
prepared a number of rebuttal statement that I suggest demonstrate the 
arguments put forward are not well thought through. Nonetheless as I'm sure 
you're already aware, convincing others that adoption of ebXML is a sound 
decision is not all that easy. As I said, the principle arguments are 
usually a) too complex, b) never heard of it - therefore not mainstream - 
therefore no 'out of the box interop', c) it's not GXA (or WSE in the latest 
terminolgy). Also of course many texts (and implementations) focus on 
relatively trivial messaging patterns.

I have taken to presenting use cases and asking how these will be met by 
alternatives. What often comes back are similar ideas to ebXML MS but using 
proprietary headers and sometimes SOAP Body elements. I then move on to talk 
about tenets like :-

- Re-invent as little as possible
- Re-use as much as possible

and about how interop is based in agreement of protocol standards (although 
I would have to agree that interop for all practical purposes is as much 
about the consistent implementation of such standards in mainstream toolkits 
- and although there are implementations of ebXML MS around they are not as 
high profile as Websphere and .Net - of course its not that hard to build an 
ebXML MS implementation - I have one in VB6 which we are using in 
production).

Inerop is a two way street though. I am just as interested in getting ebXML 
positioned alongside the WS-xx specs (even though some people seem to regard 
these as 'standards already !), and if that means ebXML has to be less 
brass-necked about some areas then so be it. I may not like the politics of 
some organisations, but if they give me what I want, I'll take it every time 
and twice on Sundays - and so will my business customers (IT is a practical 
profession). One thing I would like to see is ebXML MS allow the use of 
DIME/WS-Attachments as well as SwA/Multi-part MIME for example. I'd like to 
be able to say, Microsoft doesn't support ebXML MS - so what ! (indeed I 
have made this point a number of times and don't restrict it just to 
Microsoft (IBM are also not hugely encouraging).

Anyway, to cut a long reply short, I think what I am looking for is some new 
ammo. The people involved have heard my arguments me ad'nausism so I was 
hoping that you guys could provide me a few objective and dispasssionate 
hard to refute facts.

How about it ?

Regards

Fraser.



>From: Susan Struble <susy@sun.com>
>To: goffinf@hotmail.com
>Subject: ebXML doubts
>Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 12:00:36 -0800
>


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Susan Struble <susy@sun.com>
• To: goffinf@hotmail.com
• Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 12:00:36 -0800

Fraser:

If you are able or willing to share the negative arguments against ebXML use that you came across in a the industry portal project on which you're working, I'd appreciate hearing them. I'm always curious to hear the latest FUD.

I was a little confused by your email - probably just b/c I'm returning from holidays. Are you looking for confirmation/rebuttals of the ebXML points you outlined? Or is this what's included in the report, and you're looking for confirmation/rebuttals? As one involved in Sun's participation in ebXML development and our product supporting strategy, I'd be glad to chime in with a few points.

Regards,
Susy

-- 

Susy Struble
Web Technologies and Standards
Sun Microsystems

phone: 510 986 3644 
cell: 650 868 5517
fax: 510 869 2001
susy@sun.com

--- End Message ---