RE: Draft Agenda for Wednesday's (03 January 2001) biweekly SteeringCommittee Call

["Nieman, Scott" <Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com>]

Sorry that I could not make the telecon.  I had a last minute family
"emergency" which prevented my call-in.

ebXML RR Status:
We are having a f2f meeting in Boston hosted by Sun this Thursday and
Friday.  We plan to have team approved specifications available to QRT after
this meeting. The RIM specification may have ONLY minor editorial changes.
The major deliverable will be the Registry Services specification which QRT
is currently anticipating.

Regards,

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Nieman, Scott [mailto:Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:32 AM
To: 'Klaus-Dieter Naujok '; 'ebxml-stc '
Subject: RE: Draft Agenda for Wednesday's (03 January 2001) biweekly
Steer ingCommittee Call


StC Members,

Item#3: The issue regarding Object Query Language (OQL) is that RR feels we
need a canonical query language or some form (algebra) that all query
syntaxes resolve to.  RR's OQL vote was to pick/adopt an existing standard,
and NOT adopt anything that looks like it COULD BE a standard some day.  We
are confronted with statements suggesting the query syntax MUST BE XML
based, etc.  Well, unfortunately, there is NO XML query standard yet, nor
common database vendor implementations.  There are a number of proposals,
and they should be monitored, BUT we cannot wait.

I do not believe this is an issue for the Steering Committee.  I believe
that this should be resolved via due process.  The QRT has the option
suggest this is an issue, as well does the general public.  I believe that
XMLGlobal's issue should be voiced in the 1st public review, and is
currently premature.  RR had a vote on this in Tokyo with one objection from
XMLGlobal.    

regards,

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus-Dieter Naujok
To: ebxml-stc
Sent: 1/2/01 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Draft Agenda for Wednesday's (03 January 2001) biweekly
SteeringCommittee Call

On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 11:58:01 -0600, Mike Rawlins wrote:

>re: Item 3.  If there were messages on this issue, I haven't caught up
>with them yet.  Klaus, will you please send us a brief description of
>this issue so that we can think about it or research it a bit before we
>discuss it tomorrow?

The topic was raised via the regrep list. I expect Scott to
clarify the issue in such a way that our options should be clear
:-)

Regards,

Klaus
--
Klaus-Dieter Naujok                          ebXML & TMWG Chair
Netfish Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, Chief Technology Officer