RE: [business-transaction-comment] Specification question

[William Z Pope <zpope@pobox.com>]

As James Bryce Clark says there is work going on in ebXML with the participation of some

members of the BTP TC to explore the relationships.

 

There are no announced or known IPR encumberances on the BTP specification.

 

Regards,

BTP TC Chair

-----Original Message-----
From: James Bryce Clark [mailto:jbc@lawyer.com]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:46 PM
To: bytecode@Phreaker.net
Cc: tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com; business-transaction-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [business-transaction-comment] Specification question

At 12:53 PM 10/11/02, you wrote:

Hi
Quick question. Is the BPT Spec required by any other specs. Eg How
does it tie in to the ebXML specs ?
Does it tie into anything on the ebXML specification side ?
Thanks  /s

    From the ebXML side, I do not think we have fully worked out the right answer to that question yet.  BTP is not part of the official ebXML stack, which was designed to be a complete solution set.  Yet BTP may be complementary or substitutable, and there is some work ongoing in several ebXML spec groups to explore those relationships.   The initial results of that work seem to be promising. 
    One other issue, where I have no data, is whether BTP work has the kind of freedom from IPR encumbrances and vendor platform preferences that we try to enforce in ebXML standards. 
    My personal view only.  I am an observer, not a BTP participant, so my take may not be representative.   Regards  Jamie Clark

PS:  "phreaker.net"? 

~ James Bryce Clark
~ American Bar Association Business Law Subcommittee on E-Commerce
~  www.abanet.org/buslaw/cyber/ecommerce/ecommerce.html
~ 1 310 293 6739  jbc@lawyer.com