Subject: RE: External ID draft
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: email@example.com; 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.
eList eXpress LLC