RE: Resubmission of Distributed Registry Approaches.ppt

["Welsh, David" <David.Welsh@nordstrom.com>]

> 
> David,
> 
> Hi.  I think these two are equivalent!  The problem with ebXML 
> these days is that we have not yet unscrambled our terminology
> into phrasing that the average citizen can grasp.
> 
Well I guess it's only natural there's a bit of clear thought starting to
come out as the various components of ebXML start coming together as what
some in the crowd are calling Version 1.0; (hey, we know how projects work
in real life).

> Perhaps my statement was too succinct - but the ghist is 
> there in the intent of the CPP of allowing someone to 
> connect to a Registry via the ebXML Registry API and
> send requests and get responses.  A registry CPP, as
> Farrukh showed in the Tokyo PoC, is just a specialized
> instance of the TRP CPP.
> 
So you're saying you see various types of CPP's ? A 'registry CPP' and a
'TRP CPP'. Hmmmmmmm. Are you asking or telling ?

I must have missed that one in TP's document submitted for QR. I do see from
the definition "A CPP defines the capabilities of a Party to engage in
electronic business with other Parties." I do see the TP document mentioning
a CPP may be stored in a registry, but I don't see anything about a registry
CPP. Can you show me in the TP document that part you are looking at ?

Thanks
DMcSW

> Is that clearer?      <---- <Dave> (nope !) </Dave>
> 
> Thanks, DRRW.
> =========================================================
> 
> Message text written by "Welsh, David"
> >David ?? 
> 
> > The CPP tells you the mechanics of talking to the 
> particular registry
> > and just establishes the registries presence in hyper-space.
> > 
> > DW.
> > 
> 
> "The CPP tells you the mechanics of talking to the particular 
> registry" ?
> 
> The CPP tells you the message exchange capabilities that (or 
> it is which ?)
> a collaboration partner chooses to publish that (or which) a 
> collaboration
> partner would (we'd hope probably use) to support a 
> collaborating business
> process. 
> Of course one has to reasonably expect not every organization 
> will publish
> all their real CPP profile capabilities to the world; perhaps 
> all you'd see
> is a simple public CPP but for those 'special relations' 
> there's a special
> CPP you don't see !
> Of course one also don't need to have a CPP in a registry to 
> do a mutually
> defined business relationship, likewise for a CPA, but at 
> this point one is
> reasonably expecting a CPP to be serviced by easy to use (and free ?)
> Registry services.
> 
> The other DW
> <
>