Re:

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com>]

Waqar,

We have been playing with UDDI since it became public, and just a few days ago
I suggested internally at XMLGlobal that bridging UDDI to ebXML would be
relatively trivial assuming that the UDDI registry is complete, which it is
(test.uddi.microsft.com).  All that would have to be done is to build an object
sort of like
the ObjectQueryManager object that this group has specified, except into would
be called UDDIQueryManager, and it's methods or actions would correspond to the
UDDI find and store methods, such as find_business, store_Tmodel, etceteras.
This object would accept payload and invocation requests over ebXML TRP, and
dispatch the queries on the UDDI registry either remotely with SOAP, or locally
with a client library, and send the response back using TRP.

example query and response:


Content-Type: multipart/related; version=1.0; boundary=**bound**
Content-Length: 2286

--**bound**
Content-Type: application/vnd.eb+xml; version=1.0
Content-Description: ebxmlHeader
Content-ID: 0
Content-Length: 1466

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<ebXMLHeader MessageType="Normal"
   Version="1.0">
   <Manifest>
      <DocumentReference>
         <DocumentLabel>find_binding_req</DocumentLabel>
         ...
     </DocumentReference>
    </Manifest>
    ...
    <TPAInfo>
        <ServiceInterface>UDDIQueryManager</ServiceInterface>
        <Action>find_binding</Action>
    </TPAInfo>
    ...
  </ebXMLHeader>

--**bound**
Content-Type: application/xml; version=1.0
Content-Description: find_binding_Req
Content-ID: 1
Content-Length: 324

<find_binding serviceKey="uuid" generic="1.0" maxRows="99"
xmlns="urn:uddi-org:api">
   <findQualifiers/>
</find_binding>
--**bound**--

... and the response would have the uddi response XML body in the payload.  It
may make sense to modify the ObjectQueryManager to handle UDDI requests
internally to itself, I am more partial to simply bridging ebxml and UDDI right
now.  The UDDI API is very straight forward and is very useful for discovery of
trading partners and processes.  I saw a really neat demo at the UDDI workshop
in Redmond of UDDI integration with a procurement app (Great Plains) that made
good use of this API and registry, I very much hope that we can work the
UDDI efforts into ebXML, and would be willing to elaborate further toward that
end.

Cheers,

Matt

Waqar Sadiq wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I know that their is an effort going on in the transport team to map ebXML
> transport layer to other protocols.  I feel that a similar effort in the
> RegRep team may be a worthwhile effort.  More specifically, I think that we
> should try to map ebXML to UDDI.  I wouldn't be surprised if some members
> have already gone through that effort and in that case sharing of the
> results would be great.
>
> I realize that everybody is pretty busy with other more core issues.
> However, I personally feel that UDDI and ebXML will both survive alongside
> each other and a mapping will strengthen the two specifications.  It will
> also reveal conflicts between the two standards sooner than later.
> Currently both specifications are in the process of being defined and they
> can be changed to align with each other.  Later on, it will be difficult.
>
> While ebXML defines a UML based information model, UDDI does not define such
> a model.  So if we decide to undertake this, I will be perfectly happy to
> construct and provide the UDDI model.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Waqar Sadiq