Re: Comments on Lueder Submission

["Kit (Christopher) Lueder" <kit@mitre.org>]

Mike Rawlins wrote:
> "Kit (Christopher) Lueder" wrote <snipped>:
> > Requirements Issues:
> >  - What is the scope and focus of this group?
> The scope and focus of our project team is to define the requirements for the ebXML
> work group effort.

I meant, what was the scope and focus of the entire ebXML activity. In
particular, do we feel that none of the other groups (e.g., BizTalk,
OASIS, cXML, RosettaNet, Commerce Net (eCo Framework), MOU Management
Group, XML/EDI group, etc.) will provide a general purpose B2B XML EC
solution? Do we have confidence that those groups will yield to what we
produce, or adjust their specs to become compatible with our results?
Otherwise, what is the point of us producing yet another XML spec?

But based on your other answers below, I guess we don't know what our
scope or focus is yet. That does not bode well for a quick solution.
Kit.

> 
> >
> >
> >  - The extent to which specifications are provided for communications
> > and enveloping, versus for just the document encoding. In other words,
> > at what level is interoperability to be specified? Is ebXML going to
> > standardize on the syntax of the XML document contents as well as the
> > syntax of the document envelope?
> 
> Both requirements will be captured as different aspects of interoperability.  Your
> question deals with scope, i.e., which requirements are we going to address within the
> ebXML effort, and which will be addressed external to that effort.  I don't have any
> immediate opinions on these two other than to offer that the appropriate project teams
> are going to address the solutions.
> 
> >
> >
> >  - Compatibility with existing XML-EDI specifications, such as the
> > Technical Report developed by ANSI ASC X12. For the June 1999 X12-XML
> > draft, see: http://www.disa.org/x12/x12c/X12CTG3/PDF/xmltechreport.pdf
> 
> This gets into the issue of how much interoperability we want to support with existing
> XML initiatives, including those based on traditional EDI standards.
> 
> >
> >
> >  - Extent to which security specifications are developed by ebXML,
> > versus adopting some other XML general security solution (developed
> > outside ebXML) or of communications security (e.g., S/MIME).
> 
> Again, we will capture the requirement.  It will be up to the appropriate project team
> to recommend a solution.
> 
> --
> Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting
> http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/

-- 
    _/    _/             Kit C. J. Lueder       
   _/   _/         _/   The MITRE Corp.         Tel:  703-883-5205
  _/_/_/    _/  _/_/_/ 1820 Dolley Madison Bl  Cell: 703-577-2463
 _/   _/   _/    _/   Mailstop W658           FAX:  703-883-3383
_/    _/  _/    _/   McLean, VA 22102        Mail: kit@mitre.org
Worse than an unanswered question is an unquestioned answer.