Re: Proposal: A Registry Browser GUI tool

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>]

First a correction.

It is the simple layer that sits on top of the TRP layer not the other
way around.

The RS provides a technology netral interface
to services in UML form. Binding can be defined to various technologies
and are planned
to be specified in the appendix of RS spec.

My own RS implementation provides a Java binding that makes it completely
obvious and simple for
the RS client (e.g. RS Browser GUI tool) to access the RS blissfully
ignorant of the
underlying communication (ebXML TRP).

Demonstrating the RS functionality and its interoperable interface is
what RegRep needs to do
for Tokyo not the simple Java binding layer. Ofcourse by that time I will
offer the Java binding to
RR team for acceptance in RS sppendix as just another binding to RS.
Others are free to submit
LDAP, SOAP, DASL whatever bindings in the same level playing field.


David RR Webber wrote:

> Message text written by Nicholas Kassem
> >
> I beg to differ. You seem to imply that ebXML TRP has some systemic
> performance limitations precluding its' use in B2C scenarios. I don't
> accept this assertion.
>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> No - I'm not saying that - I'm saying there's alot of overhead
> in there that are out of place for a simple primitive interface.
>
> I've realized now that the TRP layer can sit on top of the
> primitive layer.
>
> That way if you want to talk to the primitives via TRP - cool,
> that will work.  But findamentally you have to be able to issue
> the primitive calls directly too.
>
> Demonstrating the primitives layer is what RegRep needs to
> do - not the TRP layer - we know that works already!
>
> DW.

--
Regards,
Farrukh

begin:vcard 
n:Najmi;Farrukh 
tel;fax:781-442-1610
tel;work:781-442-0703
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.sun.com
org:Sun Microsystems;Java Software
adr:;;1 Network Drive, MS BUR02-302;Burlington;MA;01803-0902;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:najmi@east.sun.com
fn:Farrukh S. Najmi
end:vcard