Hi,
Adrian, my earlier email wasn't completely correct. It should have stated: "And, this would be even better: 4. urn:iso6523:0021" (rather than "0060"). Also, I believe it might as well have stated "And, this may be even better: 6. urn:iso9362 " (without the ":1994" suffix"). I believe SWIFT is just the registrar for BIC/BEI so surely 9362 is more appropriate than 6523:0021? Also, thank you for the link to your CWA document which I hope to find some more time to digest and sorry to have missed the deadline for public comment.
So, I would like to ask would ebXML use something like "urn:iso9362" or "urn:iso6523:0021" if it existed, or would one continue to use an ebXML prefixed string like "urn:oasis:names:tc:ebxml-cppa:partyid-type:iso6523:0021"?
Also, looking at http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/ a URN NID for "iso" already exists (RFC 5141). This would indicate having to use something like "urn:iso:std:iso:9362" or "urn:iso:std:iso:6523:blahh:0060". So, wouldn't the request for a 6523 namespace or for a single 9362 namespace be to ISO rather than to IANA?
Also, wouldn't it make sense to have shortcut aliases within e.g. the ebMS <PartyId type> attribute? e.g. "bic" = "urn:oasis:names:tc:ebxml-cppa:partyid-type:iso6523:0021", and "duns" = "urn:oasis:names:tc:ebxml-cppa:partyid-type:iso6523:0060". I really can't see ebMS as being very useful in financial messaging if we have to keep specifying "urn:oasis:names:tc:ebxml-cppa:partyid-type:iso6523:0021" for the sender and the receiver in every message!
Likewise, participation in a messaging network or with e.g. a CSD shouldn't involve lengthy strings for the sender/receiver in every message. i.e. if that is your main messaging domain. Something like "urn:com:euroclear:sicovam" or just "sicovam" may be a lot more useful than something like "urn:oasis:names:tc:ebxml-cppa:partyid-type:iso15022:sicv". Also, it would be nice to minimise the impact of the ownership of these market infrastructures changing.
Best regards,
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Mueller [adrian@mueller-consulting.biz]
Sent: 10 August 2009 12:30
To: charles.kilkenny@actuare.com; ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org;
ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ebxml-dev]BBBBCCLL123<\PartyId>
Charles Kilkenny wrote:
...
>
>
> And, this would be even better:
>
>
>
> 4. urn:iso6523:0060
>
>
>
...
Dear Charles Kilkenny,
Dear all,
This statement is reassuring to see. As mentioned by Pim van der Eijk
before, we have come to the same conclusion in the CEN Workshop on
Cyber-Identity (Unique identification systems for organisations and
parts thereof). The URN namespace identifier "iso6523" should be
registered.
(http://www.cen.eu/cenorm/businessdomains/businessdomains/isss/activity/ws_c
yberid.asp)
Best regards
Adrian
--
Adrian MUELLER
Dr. Otto Mueller Consulting
Dr. Otto Mueller Consulting is registered in trustworthy directories.
These registrations show the existence of Dr. Otto Mueller Consulting
and provide relevant information about this company.
Use the service UNIVERSE® of the Ticino Chamber of Commerce and Industry
to verify these registrations(Commercial Registry of Zurich and D&B
D-U-N-S® Nr):
<http://universe.cciati.ch/urn/?urn=urn:iso6523:0169:CH-020.1.021.491-5&urn =
urn:iso6523:0060:481453301>
Office address:
Dr. Otto Mueller Consulting
c/o ID Cyber-Identity Ltd
Technoparkstr. 1
8005 Zürich
SWITZERLAND
Map: <http://map.search.ch/zuerich/technoparkstr.1>
Legal address:
Dr. Otto Mueller Consulting
Alte Landstr. 19
8803 Rueschlikon
SWITZERLAND
http://www.mueller-consulting.biz
skype:adrian.m.mueller
phone +41 44 500 50 94
mobile +41 79 502 53 45