Re: External ID draft

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by Farrukh Najmi
>
Bottom line is that you are unable to make a credible technical or business
case on your assertions that:

-CC is registry entry (metadata) and not repository item (content).
-CC assembly tools should be part of registry scope

I have asserted that both of above statements are false and have given
sound
reasons.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Farrukh,

I'm not going to argue with you any more.

I withdraw the External ID paper but would note in passing:

"one independent analysts assessment:"

ebXML: Relative to the OAG and RosettaNet, the ebXML effort is both late
and incomplete: "late" in that its initial release is not yet final;
"incomplete" in that the ebXML standards will not address semantics. In a
reversal of what the OAG has done, the ebXML initiative is entirely about
an implementation framework. It expects industry groups to create semantic
standards that will be implemented on top of the ebXML technical
architecture.

So be it; who am I to dissent?

I would respectfully ask however as to the status of the Predicate Clause
revised syntax?

Is that going to be included in the next revised Query draft, or not?

Thanks, DW.