RE: UN/CEFACT Position Statement on ebXML

["CRAWFORD, Mark" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>]

Klaus,

I have read and reread your statement, and to be honest - I am rather confused.  The statement in part appears no different than that issued by the Chair of CSG last month in Seoul.  Further, the statement appears to have many conflicting parts.  As a result, and in conjunction with recent actions regarding the CCTS and BPSS specifications, it is very unclear to me exactly what CEFACT is trying to do here.  In order to provide clarity to all, would you be so kind as to seek CEFACT CSG unequivocal responses to each of the following questions:

	1) What exactly does "UN/CEFACT recognizes that ebXML is a very important technology solution which it will continue to actively maintain and support" mean?
	2) Is CEFACT now prepared to implement the requirements for long-term management of ebXML as defined in the ebXML Requirements Technical Specification?
	3) Is CEFACT now prepared to reestablish the JCC with OASIS?
	4) Will CEFACT reverse its recent actions of removing ebXML branding from what are rightfully ebXML specifications as agreed to in Vienna and in keeping with the belief that they were furthering ebXML specifications by those individuals who worked on them?
	5) Will CEFACT firmly commit to continuing to progress these ebXML specifications in full partnership with OASIS to ensure that the ebXML framework remains intact?
	6) Will CEFACT commit to publishing its ebXML core components, business information entities, and defined business processes in an ebXML compliant registry as part of the developing ebXML framework? (please note this does not in any way limit the ICG options - it only states than any registry ICG decides on will support the ebXML registry specifications in addition to any other specifications they decide on) please also note that ebXML core components are syntax neutral and as such the premise put forth that the ebXML branding implies some syntax is misleading) 
	7) Will CEFACT commit to acting as a harmonization and approval mechanism for ebXML core components from other interested standards organizations?
	8)  Will CEFACT commit to working with OASIS to establish the joint ebXML architecture team that was promised in Vienna?
	9) Will CEFACT put in place procedures that will guarantee that individuals can not, under any circumstances, unilaterally change work products submitted by working groups?

It would seem to me that yes answers to 2 through 9 would indicate a true desire on the part of CEFACT to actively maintain and support ebXML.  Anything less indicates that in fact there is not a real commitment, and ebXML work must necessarily be done elsewhere where an organization is willing to make such commitments. 


Mark Crawford 
Vice Chair - OASIS UBL TC & Chair Naming and Design Rules Subcommittee 
Chair - UN/CEFACT XML Syntax Working Group 
Editor - UN/CEFACT Core Components 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Klaus-Dieter Naujok [mailto:knaujok@attglobal.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 7:26 PM
> To: ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org
> Subject: UN/CEFACT Position Statement on ebXML
> 
> 
> Geneva, Switzerland, October 20, 2003 - Since its 
> establishment in 1997 
> UN/CEFACT has consistently advocated and pursued adoption of a 
> technology- and implementation-neutral eBusiness strategy. In 1999 
> UN/CEFACT initiated the ebXML (eBusiness with XML) project. OASIS was 
> subsequently invited to join the initiative as a partner. The project 
> goal was to produce an XML standard that delivered both business 
> content and a technology interface in a consistent and reproducible 
> manner.
> 
> The ebXML intensive development stage successfully concluded in May 
> 2001 with the development of foundational technical 
> specifications and 
> reports. Since then UN/CEFACT and OASIS have continued collaborative 
> development of the original specifications, coordinated by a Joint 
> Coordination Committee (JCC).
> 
> In May 2003 the UN/CEFACT Plenary recognized the successful 
> completion 
> of the ebXML technical infrastructure work and endorsed the ebXML 
> specifications to allow implementation.
> 
> Acknowledging the successful conclusion of this joint work, UN/CEFACT 
> felt that the original goals of this initial phase had been achieved 
> and that all open items would be realized in the very near future. 
> Hence, UN/CEFACT felt its primary focus should return to providing 
> technology- and implementation-neutral solutions so as to 
> fully exploit 
> its unique and significant expertise in business process knowledge.
> 
> UN/CEFACT recognizes that ebXML is a very important 
> technology solution 
> which it will continue to actively maintain and support. UN/CEFACT 
> recognizes the rapid pace of technology development and remains 
> committed to the development of business content that can be 
> used with 
> any existing or future technological solution, such as 
> UN/EDIFACT, XML 
> and web services. In so doing UN/CEFACT remains open to 
> cooperation and 
> collaboration with all organizations sharing similar objectives.
> 
> UN/CEFACT Steering Group
> October 20, 2003
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Klaus-Dieter Naujok                         UN/CEFACT/TMG Chair
> Global e-Business Advisory Council            Principal Advisor
> Business: www.ge-bac.com        Personal: www.klaus.naujok.name
> TMG: www.untmg.org                           BCF: www.unbcf.org
> 
>