SV: RE: Comments to Version 0.8-Reqts Specs

["Greg FitzPatrick" <gf@medianet.org>]

Isn't the issue laid out here more like this?:

a) there will in most cases be more than one schema for names (rigid
designators).

b) extensible applications must be able to resolve this situation by the
utilization of multiple namespaces. viz. application A reaches concurrence
to application B through common reference to online schemas C,D,E...

c) naming conventions (schemas) will not always align.

d) lack of alignment might be due to: (non-exhaustive) timeliness, culture,
language, politics and error.

e) statistical applications demand correct alignment - perhaps more so than
others, since statistics is an aggregation of multiple transactions which
will not always refer to common schemas.

f) in a true "naming market" certain schemas will win a larger market-share
through user preference.  In some cases this might result in naming
monopolies.

g) statistical applications must developed mechanisms to resolve
non-aligning schemas.

h) how nice if everyone just used ISO 3166, but...

Greg

> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Från: owner-ebxml-requirements@lists.oasis-open.org
> [mailto:owner-ebxml-requirements@lists.oasis-open.org]För
> Jean.Kubler@unece.org
> Skickat: den 27 april 2000 11:36
> Till: Miller; Robert (GEIS); Klynsma; Steven L Mr DISC4/MITRE;
> 'ebXML-requirements@lists.oasis-open.org'; clivio@iso.ch
> Ämne: Re:RE: Comments to Version 0.8-Reqts Specs
>
>
> Sorry, the comment below is not correct as the name of a country
> is an importnat
> issue and that the purpose of ISO 3166 is to align all the
> various views on the
> semantics of a country code AND name. ISO 3166 is aligned with UN names of
> countries. As soon as you interface with goverment regulations,
> the semantics
> and code about country become relevant. Also, from the
> statistical point of view
> and comparability of statistics, ISO 3166 is key for the
> collection of data.
> There might be other views on the very relevance of iSO 3166.
> Regards, Jean
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> UN/ECE  Jean E. KUBLER
>         Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business
>         Tel: +41 22 9172774 http://www.unece.org/cefact
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ____________________Reply Separator____________________
> Subject:    RE: Comments to Version 0.8-Reqts Specs
> Author: "Miller; Robert (GEIS)" <Robert.Miller@geis.ge.com>
> Date:       4/25/00 6:11 PM
>
> 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