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


Hello dear RegRep TC!

Sorry for annoying you with my opinions, but here I just can't stay silent
:)

First of all, I support Erik in his observations.
Second, why do u want everyone to be smart? I don't want to be smart - I
want things around me to be smart, easy to operate and understand. Confused
where I'm coming from? Read this book
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465067107/qid=1043893177/sr=1
-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-5762810-0332102?v=glance&s=books

To be closer to the point, I have to say that if one wants his creation to
be used (adopted?) then one has to make it simple to use and understand.
About a year ago I had an assignment to choose a Registry/Repository for one
of our clients. That ultimately lead me to this TC. But think how an average
busy IT specialist makes his research! I see a name "XML Registry". Do u
expect me to go thru a 300 page manual to understand what it is and if it
can work with any other object types? The average fellow would hardly move
further than the executive summary.

We had a very useful feedback from an outsider. Don't make him feel ashamed
that he didn't read the spec - he doesn't have to!

If I can't set up time for my alarm clock it's not my fault. It is a
designers fault. They didn't make it easy to operate. Same thing applies
here.

If someone says that your creation is hard to use/understand then I'd think
twice and seek another opinion to make sure that that someone is an
exception, not a rule, unless I don't care.

Cheers,
Max Voskob




----- Original Message -----
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
To: "Still Erik R" <erik.r.still@boeing.com>
Cc: "OASIS regrep" <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 2:35 PM
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>
>



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


Powered by eList eXpress LLC