RE: Comments to Version 0.8-Reqts Specs

["Miller, Robert (GEIS)" <Robert.Miller@geis.ge.com>]

MILR: The code (or name) used to represent a country is not all that
important.  What is important is that the country have a unique semantic
identifier; that the unique semantic identifier be accesible through
whatever reference to it is made; and that the metadata associated with the
unique semantic entity support the applications that reference the entity.
It should be acceptable in ebXML to reference the country in any manner that
yields the correct semantic identification.  The metadata associated with
the semantic entity may include information useful in deriving other codes
(or names)that may be used to reference the entity.

Cheers,
        Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Klynsma, Steven L Mr DISC4/MITRE
[mailto:Steven.Klynsma@hqda.army.mil]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 6:44 AM
To: 'ebXML-requirements@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: Comments to Version 0.8-Reqts Specs


Below are US Army comments on the Version 0.8 Requirements Specs

Para 2.3 refers to Internet RFC 1766.  RFC 1766 has not progressed beyond
the status of a "proposed standard" despite having been around since 1995.
Concern centers around whether it is viable for inclusion in the Spec.

Same Para also requires ISO 3166 for country name codes.  There is current
debate within DoD over acceptance of ISO 3166.  DoD currently is
standardized on FIPS 10-4 which is not compatible with ISO 3166.  Army
recognizes, that in a document designed to implement global commerce, ISO
3166 is appropriate, but conversion to ISO 3166 for the Army is likely to be
economically impractical at this time.  

Steve Klynsma
DISC4/Mitre
Architecture Mgmt Div
(703) 614-6180
DSN 224-6180