Re: Concern with basic ebXML TRP Syntax/Semantics

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

Message text written by Christopher Ferris
>
Our intent has been, and continues to be, to submit our reqirements
to W3C or whichever body chooses to engage in the specification of an
XML packaging solution, which IMHO is clearly needed. We felt
that it was inapproprate for us (TR&P WG) to define the specification
ourselves.

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

Chris',

May I suggest that it would be appropriate for you to post a
technical note to the W3C site, and also cross-post this to the 
ebXML technical assessment group (we're just gearing up to
fill this void for people - so I'll let you know when the new 
listserve is up here).

I hate to see good ideas going astray when with some modicum
of effort we can catch these and move them forward.    It's not a 
huge effort to at least define a draft document, the goal, rough
approach and so forth to act as a catalyst.

Also - I believe strongly in the role of ebXML to facilitate
interoperability
with XML, so we should be a conduit for these peices between the proper
other
authorities.

Thanks, DW.