RE: UDDI

[Todd Boyle <todd.boyle@netaccount.com>]

Scott: 6. desember 2000 18:53;  ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org 

> ebXML Registry Project Team cannot afford to spend any time

Naturally.  You're resource constrained and have not been sitting on
unexpended resources (like the UDDI corporations)

> UDDI announcement, which I personally feel grew out of the disbelief 
> that ebXML would be able to deliver any specifications at all.  

Nahhh.  They just want to take the ideas to market immediately.  That's
what corporations are bound to do, under our sick IP system: cherrypick
the best ideas of human society, lock them up with patents and copyrights,
and build products with seductive user interfaces.

> Reference the misinformation from Gartner:

Irrelevant, more than a year old.

> Maybe we (ebXML) just did this to ourselves by making our draft documents
> publically available.  I am just disappointed that when we asked parties
to
> participate, they did not come to the table but perhaps just monitored our
> lists.

Nahh.  Keep going, you're doing the right thing.  My 2 cents, below, is
humbly submitted; I am not omnicient that's why I usually post my junk
on the alt hierarchy instead of bothering you folks here,
TOdd

From: Todd Boyle
Newsgroup: alt.accounting
Date: September 9th 2000
Subject: IBM and Microsoft high jinks

The technologies of ebXML are being torn away from the carcass and 
carried away by the dingoes of the software industry. ebXML is a very 
civilized group of course, or they would never have formed a standards 
body in the first place.  They think it's fine to see software companies 
compete on fundamental platform issues like registries and business 
process modeling.  Frinstance, Ed Julson said Thursday, September 07, 
2000 ebxml-awareness list,

> First of all, I believe the UDDI spec in its current incarnation 
> provides a repository for business information that is complementary
> [..]
> The ebXML Reg/Rep focus is to build a container for the XML 
> vocabularies, core components, and business process that are 
> needed for the programmatic support of a business transaction 
> or document exchange. 
> [..]
> It's conceivable that UDDI could evolve to a point of overlap
 
ebXML workgroups, gird your loins, and prepare to embrace and extend the 
work of commercial competitors.  This means adopting everything which is 
good and not proprietary, and willfully breaking whatever they build 
which is proprietary.

It would be lunacy for the scale of effort that has gone into ebXML to 
be cherrypicked by commercial competitors, without compensation. They 
will inevitably differentiate their technologies, breaking key parts of 
ebXML work.  

I call on UDDI to contribute all of their work to ebXML, and accommodate 
the requests of non-UDDI consortium participants in ebXML.  Especially 
ebXML participants from the software buyers rather than vendors side, 
and small business segment rather than EDI segment....  (if you can find 
any... )

Is that naive?  Yes of course it is.  If UDDI wanted to participate in a 
standards process, they would be sitting at the ebXML table, instead of 
their corp. HQs designing UDDI.  It is hard to escape the conclusion 
that ebXML is the same as a software company.  It must compete, with its 
strengths, and play good poker.  

Software design is predominantly about securing niches and customers--- 
more than 50% of the budget or resources of ebXML needs to be devoted to 
analysis of competing commercial registries, and competing commercial 
middleware, competing commercial repositories and modelling standards.  
More than 50% of commercial software developers' budget is certainly 
devoted to structures necessary to secure and retain a grip on 
customers, in ways that cannot be immediately commoditized. 

BPMI somehow bothers me as well.  They were formed what, August 2000? 
http://www.bpmi.org/faq.html --innocently they say "BPMI.org and ebXML 
are addressing complementary aspects of e-Business process integration. 
While ebXML provides a standard way to manage Collaborative Business 
Processes (CBP), BPMI.org focuses on the modeling, deployment, and 
management of Enterprise Business Processes (EBP). "  Yeah right. 

Obviously, Business Processes extend across enterprise lines. Splitting 
the internal BP modelling and development from inter-entity is an 
unfortunate step that will setback the integration efforts by years, 
harming both the internal and external parties.

BPML and UDDI are birds of a feather, if you ask me.  Let's get their 
authors integrated into ebXML, or impose consequences.  The individuals 
who are selling this to IT are not invincible.  Their story does not 
hang together and should be challenged. ebXML's architecture must become 
a more dynamic thing, capable of willful and measured changes, TO DEFEAT 
COMPETITORS.  You have to move up the food chain, and become the lion of 
the savannahs instead of the antelope.
 
Todd
 
* Todd F. Boyle CPA    http://www.GLDialtone.com/
* tboyle@rosehill.net    Kirkland WA    (425) 827-3107
* XML accounting, web ledgers, BSPs, ASPs, whatever it takes