RE: External ID draft

[sfuger@AIAG.ORG]

Unless I have greatly misunderstood the intent, the idea is that when a new
business process is needed, related core components would be discovered and
joined together to build a schema for the related new transaction.

I'm not sure we currently have this capability in our registry.

Sally



-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber [mailto:Gnosis_@compuserve.com]
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 12:26 PM
To: Farrukh Najmi
Cc: ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org; Yutaka Yoshida
Subject: Re: External ID draft


Message text written by Farrukh Najmi
> 
David,

I have been under the assumption that a core component is a repository
item and not a registry entry. Do you have some new information from CC
that says that they are RegistryEntry? If I am correct then we still do
not have a use case for justifying URI for RegistryEntry.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Farrukh, now I'm confused!  I thought we had pretty much removed the
concept of repository - since it stores information instances, not
metadata.
i.e. its your backedn Oracle database full of business transactions that
conform to the metadata definitions stored in the registry.

The CCmps are obviously metadata, and utilize our RIM to marry to their
RIM in the way they expect the interactions between items in the registry
to deliver behaviours they are wanting in assoicating and retrieving
CCmps.

Or have missed something here?!

Thanks, DW.