[regrep] FW: Core Components Specifications

["CHIUSANO, Joseph" <JCHIUSANO@lmi.org>]

Title: FW: Core Components Specifications

Please see below - posted on behalf of Mark Crawford.

> **************************************************************************
>   Joseph M. Chiusano
>   Logistics Management Institute
>   2000 Corporate Ridge
>   McLean, VA 22102
>   Email: jchiusano@lmi.org
>   Tel: 571.633.7722
> **************************************************************************
>

-----Original Message-----
From: CRAWFORD, Mark
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 9:23 AM
To: CHIUSANO, Joseph
Subject: FW: Core Components Specifications

Joe,

I can't post to the regrep list.  Can you send this in my behalf?

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: CRAWFORD, Mark
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 9:04 AM
To: 'OASIS Registry List '; ''Ebtwg-Ccs (list)' '; ''eBTWG (list)' '
Subject: RE: Core Components Specifications

Isn't 2P worth more than $0.02?  Although a strong proponent of XML and involved in a number of XML initiatives, and although I believe that Duane's arguments are valid for an XML based architecture, I still believe that Philip's arguments make more sense for the syntax neutral architecture we are trying to build.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Goatly [mailto:philip.goatly@bolero.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 4:32 AM
> To: Duane Nickull; CRAWFORD, Mark
> Cc: 'David RR Webber - XMLGlobal '; 'Hermes Hartmut '; 'OASIS Registry
> List '; ''Ebtwg-Ccs (list)' '; ''eBTWG (list)' '
> Subject: Re: Core Components Specifications
>
>
> Folks,
>
>    Since ebXML has endorsed the UMM modeling initiative, then
> I guess that
> if we are to have a complete modeling
>    language for e-commerce it must include the 'static data'
> as well. This
> of course includes what are called currently
>    core components. So I guess you are stuck with UML, or UMM
> must become
> XML based :-)
>    No matter what one is doing one has a model in one's head.
> Telepathy is
> not a very good way of communicating it,
>    neither is speech. The formalisation of the model on 'paper/screen/
> etc.helps to communicate the design and intention.
>   A picture is worth a thousand lines of XML.
>
>    One should not assume that only the artifact to be
> produced from a UML
> model will be XML - a UML model is
>    sufficiently  generic as to be able to produce - Java,
> C++, Smalltalk
> CORBA, IDL, Databases Relational or otherwise.
>    Methods may be defined Use cases, Activity & State etc. In fact it
> follows an 'OO' paradigm. XML of itself does not.
>
>     XML is just one possible implementation. However if the
> only tool you
> have is a hammer to whole world looks like a
>    nail. i.e If you only know XML ..... :-)
>
>    One must not ignore either the other intiatives in s/w
> enginerring such
> as MDA (Model Driven Architecture) which is being
>     promoted by the OMG and is well received.
>
>    I urge you to think bigger and wider than XML.
>
>    my 2p
>
> Cheers, Phil Goatly
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Duane Nickull" <duane@xmlglobal.com>
> To: "CRAWFORD, Mark" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>
> Cc: "'David RR Webber - XMLGlobal '"
> <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>; "'Hermes
> Hartmut '" <Hartmut.Hermes@MCH11.siemens.de>; "'OASIS Registry List '"
> <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>; "''Ebtwg-Ccs (list)' '"
> <ebtwg-ccs@lists.ebtwg.org>; "''eBTWG (list)' '"
> <ebtwg@lists.ebtwg.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 11:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Core Components Specifications
>
>
> >
> >
> > > "CRAWFORD, Mark" wrote:
> > >
> > > There is nothing in the CC spec that violates the requirements
> > > document.  Storage of CCs as UML defined objects is in
> keeping with
> > > the ebXML architecture document, and provides a much
> cleaner way to
> > > support OO, XML, and EDI instantiations.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > Mark et al:
> >
> > Conceptually, we should not be talking about UML to XML conversions.
> > Try to think of a Core Component as an artifact which can
> have UML or
> > XML expressions of itself.  They are two different
> presentations of the
> > same thing, not two different things.
> >
> > > BTW, if you really want syntax neutral representations, then XML
> > > doesn't cut it.  It is as syntax specific as UML.  Lets
> use ASCII text
> > > descriptions.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > Last time I looked, ASCII is not considered 100% syntax
> neutral either.
> > :)
> >
> > We have to have at least one default syntax for expression.
>  UML is fine
> > but XML does have some advantages.
> >
> > Many people assume that we don't need XML becuase they have the UML.
> > XML can be parsed by either a Human OR an application.  The
> same is not
> > true for UML.  Before you rush to type a rebuttal to this
> email, becuase
> > Rational Rose can generate code from UML,  examine the
> facts behind this
> > easily misinterpretted phenomena:
> >
> > When people view the UML in Rose or other tools, they don't often
> > realize that the UML they see is being internally built
> from XML (XMI in
> > some cases) or some other internal, structured code.  The
> internal code
> > structure powers the presentation of the UML, not the other
> way around.
> > Many simply misinterpret the GUI rendition as the actual object
> > (artifact).
> >
> > Since an XML file, if properly structured and robust
> enough, can be used
> > as the source to automatically build a UML presentation,
> and the other
> > way around is not true (binary UML to XML), I would highly
> favour using
> > XML as the default syntax.  XML can be easily transformed into many
> > other graphical and non graphical presentations as well. 
> Since at least
> > one structured (normalized rendition) is probably going to
> be requested
> > by those who are writing software for Design Time, I
> strongly suggest
> > that having a default XML structure for Core Components as
> the default
> > presentation syntax.
> >
> > My $0.02 worth.
> >
> > Duane Nickull
> >
> > --
> > CTO, XML Global Technologies
> > ****************************
> > Transformation - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/foundation/
> > ebXML Central - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/central/
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.ebtwg.org/ob/adm.pl>
> >
>