OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: Re: [regrep] Describing ebXML Reg/Rep - observations from Santa Fe


Erik,

Thank you for your feedback (you must be a colleague of Kathyrn's). 
Some comments:

#1 below:
<Excerpt>
It seemed helpful to clarify that an ebXML Registry does not necessarily
use XML in its implementation, and that its contents do not need to be
restricted to XML artifacts.  
</Excerpt>

From the RIM spec:

"The registry provides a stable store where information submitted by a
Submitting Organization is made persistent. Such information is used to
facilitate ebXML-based Business to Business (B2B) partnerships and
transactions. Submitted content may be XML schema and documents, process
descriptions, ebXML Core Components, context descriptions, UML models,
information about parties and even software components."

This is made quite clear in the spec - are you suggesting then that we
emphasize it whenever we present the Registry specification in
presentations?  If this was not emphasized at the conference, I can
definitely understand as the *main focus* of the Registry architecture
is, after all, XML.

#2 below:
<Excerpt>
2.  Some people seemed to have the impression that the RIM was
essentially a software package that could be simply installed.  It seems
important to be clear that the RIM is a model and a standard - a level
of abstraction above any actual implementation of the standard.
</Excerpt>

I don't doubt even for a picosecond your impression of the attendees'
reaction, but it does surprise me given that the "M" in "RIM" should
really speak for itself (i.e. it is a "M"odel).  Would you be willing to
elaborate as to why you feel that people had this very incorrect
impression?

Thanks,
Joe

"Still, Erik R" wrote:
> 
> Having attended the Open Metadata Registries conference in Santa Fe, I have some observations regarding
> the presentation and description of ebXML Reg/Rep and RIM that might have some bearing on the understanding
> and acceptance of these standards and specifications among the broader metadata community:
> 
> 1.  For the people not familiar with an ebXML Registry, there seemed to be some confusion about the relationship
> between XML and the Registry.  It seemed helpful to clarify that an ebXML Registry does not necessarily
> use XML in its implementation, and that its contents do not need to be restricted to XML artifacts.  The ebXML
> label suggests things about the Registry that are not true, and may cause some people to dismiss an ebXML
> Registry because they are "interested in metadata, but not XML".  In presenting the ebXML Registry spec,
> it is important to explain what ebXML is, and it's relation to the spec.
> 
> 2.  Some people seemed to have the impression that the RIM was essentially a software package that
> could be simply installed.  It seems important to be clear that the RIM is a model and a standard - a level of
> abstraction above any actual implementation of the standard.
> 
> I expect that it is not necessary to reiterate such points within this community.  But when presenting the
> ebXML Reg/Rep to others, making these issues clear up front will go a long way in reducing confusion and
> gaining understanding and acceptance.
> 
>         - Erik
> 
> Erik Still
> erik.r.still@boeing.com
> CENTRAL Registry
> Boeing Library Services
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

Attachment: Chiusano_Joseph.vcf
Description: Card for Joseph Chiusano



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC