RE: Volunteers required for standards mapping

[yanqin xu <xuzenu@hotmail.com>]

Hi, David,

I agree with you since we talk about this part of work in the transportation 
group. But if we have more time and resources and could think from standards 
overall, including Core Components and Business Process, as well as 
transporataion layer, then I think it would be very beneficial to have 
comparison with different standards in different levels. It would help us 
understand better where ebXML really is better than other standards, where 
it needs to be improved. The comparison work will also help us to define 
comformance in the future and interoperability between ebXML and other 
standards.

Doug Dunting from Ariba told me he had been volunteered to do the comparison 
work between ebXML and cXML earlier in a conference call, so we agreed that 
he is going to continue to do this comparison work. Since OAG actually is a 
content level standard, or document standard, there is no message part of 
comparison needed to be done between OAG and ebXML. That is to say, I don't 
need to do any comparison work here in transportation layer. I am glad about 
that because I am quite busy recently. However I will do content level 
comparison among these standards whenever I have time.

I just have one request, that is, whenever anyone finish your work, please 
send to this email list so that everybody can share your work and 
experience.

Thank you very much for your clarification, thanks everyone for your work.

Regards,

Jenny Xu


>From: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
>To: 'yanqin xu' <xuzenu@hotmail.com>, ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>Subject: RE: Volunteers required for standards mapping
>Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:38:00 -0800
>
>Jenny
>
>Remember we are doing **message headers** and not the content or payload of
>the message. I think this means that we should not do items 2 or 3. However
>including the messaging part of OAG and CXML could make sense ... however 
>it
>won't happen without volunteers to do the work ;-)
>
>My guess is that we should aim for around two weeks to finish the work from
>the formal "start" which will likely be later this week.
>
>David
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: yanqin xu [mailto:xuzenu@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 6:41 AM
>To: Burdett, David; ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>Subject: RE: Volunteers required for standards mapping
>
>
>Hi, David,
>
>I think there are three more needed to consider:
>[1] CXML
>[2] In the document content level, OAG. Maybe this work should belong to CC
>or CCBP group?
>[3] In the document content level, OASIS Catalog and EBXML Catalog. Maybe
>this work should belong to CC or CCBP too?
>
>I can do the comparison work between EBXML and CXML, and between EBXML and
>OAG if nobody else likes to do it. But I don't know anything about OASIS
>Catalog.
>
>By the way, what is the time frame to finish the work?
>
>Thanks.
>
>Regards,
>
>Jenny Xu
>Standard Architect
>
>
>
> >From: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
> >To: "ebXML Transport (E-mail)" <ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org>
> >Subject: RE: Volunteers required for standards mapping
> >Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 12:58:22 -0800
> >
> >So to summarise, the following have "volunteered" to do standards 
>mappings
> >on the following protocols:
> >* BizTalk 2.0 - Shawn Suzik
> >* EDIINT AS2 - Dick Brooks
> >* ICE - Eric Leckner
> >* RosettaNet 2.0 - Krishna Sankar
> >
> >If there are any more please send an email to the list. What I propose 
>is:
> >1. We wait to Monday next to see if there are any more standards ... 
>and/or
> >volunteers ;)
> >2. I will produce an Excel spreadsheet of the current elements/attributes
> >in
> >ebXML so that we all use the same starting point
> >3.  Where (if) there is more than one volunteer, the people involved 
>agree
> >between themselves how they will work together
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >David
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Burdett, David
> >Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 6:26 PM
> >To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
> >Subject: Volunteers required for standards mapping
> >
> >
> >In the conference call this morning it was agreed that it would be a good
> >idea to start comparing the current version of the spec (0.8) with other
> >similar standards to identify the "gaps". The initial shortlist of
> >standards
> >were:
> >*	BizTalk version 2.0
> >*	RosettaNet Implementation Framework (RNIF) version 2.0
> >
> >Do we need to compare any others?
> >
> >Comparison involves reviewing these standards headers and:
> >*	mapping the header elements to ebXML version 0.8
> >*	identifying data or elements that are missing and,
> >*	making a provisional recommendation on whether or not additional
> >data or changes should be made to ebXML
> >
> >Now for the hard part !!
> >
> >To do the comparison effectively needs someone who knows the standard 
>well.
> >I am volunteering to do BizTalk, so that means we need a volunteer for 
>RNIF
> >2.0.
> >
> >If you think that some other standard needs to be compared then please be
> >prepared to volunteer yourself to do the comparison or volunteer someone
> >else ;)
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >David
> >
> >Product Management, CommerceOne
> >4400 Rosewood Drive, Pleasanton, CA 94588, USA
> >Tel: +1 (925) 520 4422 (also voicemail); Pager: +1 (888) 936 9599
> >mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com; Web: http://www.commerceone.com
>
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com