Re: Message Service Interface

[Nicholas Kassem <Nick.Kassem@eng.sun.com>]

Good to hear that we are on the same page :-)

Regards,
Nick

At 02:13 PM 8/30/2000 -0700, Gordon van Huizen wrote:
>Nick,
>
> > However, the argument that a UML based MSI
> > definition could contribute to the "proof of correctness" of the MS spec.
> > may have some merit. It certainly  can't hurt. It may also formalize the MS
> > & BP layering.
>
>These were the key motivations I saw for pressing ahead with the MSI
>work. The former makes the effort directly relevant to the goal of
>interoperable MS implementations, at least to my mind. The latter is
>precisely the kind of "integration" work we need to perform to make
>ebXML really hang together, and ensure that our bases are covered
>between the various project teams.
>
>I'll leave it to the team leaders to prioritize the MSI definition
>within the schedule, but I do believe it to be important for the above
>reasons.
>
>-gvh-
>begin:vcard
>n:Van Huizen;Gordon
>tel;work:510-848-1988
>x-mozilla-html:TRUE
>url:http://www.sonicmq.com
>org:Progress Software;XML and Internet Technology
>adr:;;14 Oak Park;Bedford;MA;01730;
>version:2.1
>email;internet:gvh@progress.com
>title:Director, Product Management
>fn:Gordon Van Huizen
>end:vcard