Subject: RE: Implicit CPP/CPA for Registry and Registry client
Scott,
Your definition of Explicit and Implicit CPP/CPAs is correct.
Scott Hinkelman, Senior Software Engineer
XML Industry Enablement
IBM e-business Standards Strategy
512-823-8097 (TL 793-8097) (Cell: 512-940-0519)
srh@us.ibm.com, Fax: 512-838-1074
"Nieman, Scott" <Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com> on 04/04/2001 07:23:40
AM
To: "'Farrukh Najmi '" <najmi@east.sun.com>,
"'ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org '" <ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org>
cc:
Subject: RE: Implicit CPP/CPA for Registry and Registry client
Farrukh,
Help me out on this one.
If you are basing the CPP/CPA on the TP/BP work, would not this be an
"explicit" CPP/CPA, which is what I have been suggesting for a while?
Implicit suggests that the physical CPP does not exist, but is implied.
im·plic·it (m-plst) adj. Implied or understood though not directly
expressed
I really believe the physical CPP must exist to understand the capabilities
of a registry.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi
To: ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org
Sent: 4/4/01 6:47 AM
Subject: Implicit CPP/CPA for Registry and Registry client
I wanted to remind the team that I am working on an action item from our
last meeting to re-introduce the implicit CPP/CPA for the registry and
registry client. These were removed from the spec when we got woefully
out of date with the TP teams specs. My action item is to bring them
up-to-date with current TP and BP specs.
So yes the registry will have an implicit template CPP in the spec
defined in terms of the TP and BP specs as will the registry client. The
two CPPs will be used in much the same way as 2 parties that wish to
conduct eBuisness together. This has always been the intent of our
specs.
--
Regards,
Farrukh
<<Card for Farrukh Najmi>>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-regrep-request@lists.ebxml.org
Powered by
eList eXpress LLC