[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: CC Requirements : RE: Formal Protest from XMLGlobal.
Martin / David, In Tokyo, we spent a good amount of time Thursday reviewing the information model with Chris Nelson. We discovered that much of the model easily maps to the existing RIM, and later that day resolved the "context" issue. Therefore the CC information model can potentially become the scheme for retrieving any CC information from a registry. The principle is that what you put in is what you get back out. The level of specificity is up to you and is determined by the CC scheme and its mapping to the RIM. We agreed to assist CC in developing an Implementation Guide to assist in this process. However, I am concerned about a few things: 1) Requirements need to flow through the Requirements Project Team who resolves interdependencies between Project teams. 2) There seems to be a requirement to be able to resolve entity references directly from a DOM parser (second and third paragraph); interaction with the registry currently requires TRP which was a StC decision. At this time every request to the Registry needs authentication. RR discussed session and state management which could potentially assist direct DOM interaction with the Registry. That too would require at least the first request (during bootstrap) to authenticate and establish a session. The issue is state management, as that leads to security vunerability. As such, RR is not supporting session and state management by the Geneva release, but possibly by the Vienna release. Best regards, Scott -----Original Message----- From: Martin Bryan To: Nieman, Scott; 'David RR Webber '; 'ebxml repository '; 'Klaus-Dieter Naujok ' Sent: 12/28/00 4:00 AM Subject: Re: Formal Protest from XMLGlobal. Scott > Please help me out regarding the Core Component request. Was it a > "requirements" document that was emailed directly to me, that I forwarded it > to our list? The posting got zero replies, so I brought it up to the StC > four weeks ago. We (RR/CC) needs to follow up with a teleconference to > either discuss this version, or perhaps a version that includes more > background information and examples. Is this information also in the ebXML > Requirements specification? The final version of the requirements, as submitted to the CC website on 14th December (whether or not anyone sent it direct to you I do not know) is attached. There are only a few minor changes to the version submitted to you in Tokyo, all of which are related to terminology changes made on the CC side as we reviewed our metamodel on 13th Dec. Martin Bryan <<CCRegReqs.doc>>
Powered by eList eXpress LLC