RE: Trading Partner Logical Identification based on EDIFACT orX12qualifiers

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

Dick,

Alright - so you have an existing product and you are into the weeds
on implementating all this....your trusty Ford may just need a new
set of tyres...

Message text written by INTERNET:dick@8760.com
>My existing B2B products contain a database of trading partner information
that the system administrators are responsible for managing. Trading
Partners have no access to this database and that is the safest solution,
in
my opinion. If you want to make your products trading partner database
accessible over the Internet through API's then go for it. But don't make
me
do the same, it should be my CHOICE, not MANDATED!

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was never for one minute suggesting you should expose
                               your customer base - that's nuts!   Only if
a new customer
                              wants to add themself to your system and they
can be
                             pre-qualified - then business logic says -
'bring 'em in please!'.
                             That's all we're asking for here, an
interchange profile.
<<
Also, I never said it was too much work to provide an API (those were your
words), my position is this:
  Mandating the use of a regrep API:
   - introduces an unnecessary security risk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What?! If its done right its the opposite!  It provides a 
                                 secondary level of authentication with a
trusted source.  
                                 Is this person really who he says he is?
<<
   - is inefficient because it adds an unnecessary remote access to each
interchange
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again - you just cannot say that.  Your mileage will vary
                                 depending on business use.  I can
definately say there
                                  will be business case where people will
absolutely
                                  want this - and if you don;t have it then
it will hurt ebXML
                                  acceptance.
<<
   - it's questionable whether or not it adds any real value in terms of
interoperability
   - it should be optional for those ebXMLers who are willing to take the
risk and find it useful
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dick - that's politics, not sound engineering.  Let's 
                                  examine the business semantic interchange
needs,
                                  the business process needs, and then make
objective
                                  decisions - I know you're not disagreeing
with that - I've
                                  laid out a strawman laundry list to get
there - feedback
                                  please!

Thanks, DW.