RE: ebXML POC

[Rik Drummond <rvd2@worldnet.att.net>]

simon. i would be glad to help you develop this message... i have some
thoughts... let me know... rik

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Kassem [mailto:Nick.Kassem@eng.sun.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 5:17 PM
To: Simon Nicholson
Cc: Ebxml-Poc
Subject: Fwd: ebXML POC


Simon,

We are working hard to get some of the technical issues sorted out but we
aren't making fast enough progress on the "Business Message" we would like
to give as part of the Tokyo-POC. We need to wordsmith, using appropriate
language, a business message such that we can answer the question; " this
is all very good but as a business person tell me why I should care about
this event and what problem are you solving ?". I think we have lots of
good answers but we need to get the language right and make the story
compelling.

Do you think you or someone from the coms WG can help us craft the couple
of pages we need ? Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Nick

p.s. I expect this message to serve as the cover page for the POC hand-out
material.


>..snip

>Dear STCers,
>
>A quick update on the status of the Tokyo-poc. Following our scheduled
>conf. call today, the POC team agreed to meld the GCI & AIAG proposals
>into a single consolidated proposal. Given the number of roles and
>participants we also agreed to rationalize the demo such that we enlighten
>rather than confuse the audience. We intend to maintain an engineering
>focus and strive for open interoperable solutions. Marketing ebXML is a
>desirable side-effect of this work as opposed to being the main rationale.
>
>Neither AIAG nor the GCI payloads will be characterized as aligned or
>miss-aligned with ebXML since the POC team (as a whole) has no way of
>measuring this.  The only definitive authority for measuring such
>alignment are peer-reviewed and publicly available specs. My assumption is
>that the responsible WGs are studiously and methodically working to
>accomplish this end.
>
>I expect to have a draft POC proposal available for your review within a
week.
>
>Regards,
>Nick
>