Hey, in the report I'm writing I noted the concerns of Mike Rawlins vis-a-vis interoperability but went on to make the following argument "interoperability issues have been vigorously addressed by the ebXML community, via the OASIS Implementation, Interoperability and Conformance TC <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-iic/> , interoperability tests are regularly conducted by the Drummond Group (recent results here: <http://www.ebusinessready.org/pr_ebxml.html> ) the European Interoperability ebXML - Pilot Project (located here <http://www.cenorm.be/cenorm/businessdomains/businessdomains/isss/activity /e bxml_interop.asp> xml 2003 presentation abstract <http://www.idealliance.org/papers/dx_xmle03/html/abstract/02-06-01.html> ), the search for interoperability in the ebxml community seems determined by governmental and non-vendor organizations who have an interest in assuring interoperability for all vendors, whereas in the Web Services community, as exemplified by WS-1 one could argue that interoperability is undermined by vendors comprising the standards organization, and thereby using it as a political tool against competing vendors. " which I don't know how others see it but standing outside it does look to me that ebXML's search for interoperability is more serious than that of the WS-1 group. Then I make the following statement: "Interoperability is further enhanced by relying on UBL for providing the Common Expression, perhaps also Common Vocabulary. " Which statement might be BS caused by my particular focus, i.e. we have UBL, if we go to ebXML we will have it to support our UBL transactions etc. Anyway if anyone has any particular hard commentary on these statements I would welcome them. The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/>
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>