Re: FW: ebXML ARTICLE

[mblantz@LTVSteel.com]

Rachel,

Speaking as a 'business' representative, and as the only one currently on the
Steering
Committee, I have some comments.

Certainly you are correct that we will be demanding certain functionality of our
suppliers,
not because we "must" but because that's what happens when one is the customer
and has
business requirements.

 AIAG has very actively supported the work of ebXML, and the AIAG Board of
Directors
has agreed to wait until our work is finished before rushing to implement XML.
Doing it "NOW",
when it's not ready, would just be a waste of time and resources.

We in the automotive industry have great interest in Registry and Repository,
Technical Architecture, and Transport and Routing. That's why we have
representatives on
all of the above as well as Business Process and Core Components.

Business Process and Core Components are not the only project teams where all
issues
have not yet been resolved.   We on those two groups are working hard to
understand
each other, and reach common understanding.   Are the rest of you doing the
same, or
are you just focusing on us?

Mary Kay







Rachel Foerster <rachelf@ix.netcom.com> on 07/27/2000 08:50:11 PM

Please respond to rachelf@ix.netcom.com

To:   "ebXML Steering Committee (E-mail)" <ebxml-stc@lists.ebxml.org>
cc:    (bcc: Mary K Blantz/CLGO/LTV)
Subject:  FW: ebXML ARTICLE



All,

This is an interesting article that Carol Geyer has pointed us to. In my
mind it highlights in clear unambiguous terms why we must succeed and do it
quickly. Futhermore, it also helps us to recognize that we must resolve the
concerns/issues relative to CC and BP specifications quickly if ebXML hopes
to be at all relevant in the e-business space in the short and long term. We
just can not afford to spin wheels or go off into left field. What we
develop must be relevant NOW, implementable NOW, and understandable by the
non-technical, non-geeky business person, who must ultimately demand that
their ISV's incorporate the ebXML framework into their solutions. If the
business people can't understand it and see its relevance, they most
certainly won't make it a business requirement.

Rachel

|
|
|
|Just wanted to be sure you all saw the following:
|
|July 24, 2000
|InternetWeek
|"XML Standards: A Problem Of Physics"
http://www.internetwk.com/columns00/bit072400.htm
|
|There's an old physics problem that pits an irresistible force
|against an
|immovable object. What will happen, physicists wonder, when
|the two meet?
|
|Well, I don't know anything about physics, but I think the IT
|industry is
|preparing to test that old problem. The irresistible force: e-business
|technology. The immovable object: international standards.
|
|In two weeks, the ebXML standards group will meet in San Jose.
|The group,
|made up of representatives from the United Nations' CEFACT standards
|committees as well as the vendor-dominated OASIS industry
|consortium, is
|working on standards that will make XML data understandable across
|industries and international boundaries. The group plans to have XML
|messaging and business process specifications ready by the
|middle of next
|year...
|
|--Carol
|
|____________________________________________
|Carol Geyer
|Media Relations Consultant
|OASIS
|carol.geyer@oasis-open.org
|Tel: +1.941.926.2322
|Fax: +1.505.210.2878
|
|OASIS         http://www.oasis-open.org
|XML.org       http://xml.org
|XML Cover Pages    http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/
|ebXML         http://www.ebXML.org
|CGM Open      http://www.cgmopen.org
|