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] Implementing CCTS in Registry - further thoughts


If that can cover all of the metadata and associations defined in the CC
spec, then I think that is an excellent idea.  I still do think,
however, that it will require some up-front analysis by several of us
(including you if you'd like Matt) to determine exactly how the
requirements in the CC spec can be met - but we've got a great handle on
it given our previous analysis work in the CC Review subteam.

- Joe

Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
> 
> I think I am a moderate in this debate, because I think the proper
> course of action involves acknowledging CCTS (or a serialization format
> therof) in the specification by including a non-normative appendix
> containing a content indexing stylesheet (which I will take an AI on).
> 
> The benefit of doing this is that we do not compromise the architecture
> by doing it, and we get to explicitly mention CCTS in the specification
> which should make some people happy.  I think Farrukh even has a CPPA
> content indexing stylesheet hanging around, so we would not be playing
> favorites.
> 
> What does everyone think?
> 
> -Matt
> 
> Dave Welsh wrote:
> 
> >-1
> >
> >I can imagine that not making the essential business artifacts 1st class
> >might sound technically nice but we are trying to enable business.
> >
> >I think there will be a set of business focused use case 'asks' for
> >specialized business services we'd hope the Registry will provide; to
> >make the business experience even more effective. Therefore, in the
> >interest of the business community, I'd like to suggest waiting for the
> >CC and BP teams input before passing any judgment.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com]
> >>Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 11:58 AM
> >>To: Farrukh Najmi
> >>Cc: Fuger, Sally; Chiusano Joseph; David RR Webber - XML ebusiness;
> >>
> >>
> >OASIS
> >
> >
> >>Registry List
> >>
> >>+1
> >>
> >>Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Your suggestion has definitely crossed my mind. I have asked myself:
> >>>"maybe CCTS, BPSS, CPP/A are special and maybe we should give them
> >>>
> >>>
> >first
> >
> >
> >>>class status?"
> >>>
> >>>After careful analysis I feel that it would be a mistake to give
> >>>
> >>>
> >them
> >
> >
> >>>first class status no matter how "integral" a part of ebXML they
> >>>
> >>>
> >are. We
> >
> >
> >>>still must not have a tight coupling to them in ebXML Registry. Here
> >>>
> >>>
> >are
> >
> >
> >>>some reasons why not:
> >>>
> >>>-It is not necessary. No use case has been articulated that cannot
> >>>
> >>>
> >be
> >
> >
> >>>met without having a binding to the generic ebXML Registry as it is
> >>>
> >>>
> >>today.
> >>
> >>
> >>>-It violates ebXML Architecture's goal of avoiding tight dependency
> >>>between ebXMl specs (Duane can remind us of the exact verbiage I am
> >>>
> >>>
> >>sure)
> >>
> >>
> >>>-It is not a good design. A good design keeps layers one spec on
> >>>
> >>>
> >another
> >
> >
> >>>and avoids a circular dependency. CCTS should depend on ebXML
> >>>
> >>>
> >Registry
> >
> >
> >>>(which is a foundational spec) but not the other way around.
> >>>
> >>>-It tells others non-ebXML specs (e.g. HL7, OGC, OAG, etc.) to "do
> >>>
> >>>
> >as we
> >
> >
> >>>say, not as we do". That would not only be be hypocritical it would
> >>>create complexity due to special case handling resulting in creating
> >>>
> >>>
> >two
> >
> >
> >>>ways of doing the same thing.
> >>>
> >>>I feel that this issue cuts to the very essence of the core
> >>>
> >>>
> >philosophy
> >
> >
> >>>of our ebXML Registry specifications (extensible, generic,
> >>>content-neutral architecture) and urge that we reach a common
> >>>understanding on this issue soon. To that end I propose that we make
> >>>this the main/sole agenda item for our next TC meeting.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>--
> >>VP Strategic Relations,
> >>Technologies Evangelist
> >>XML Global Technologies
> >>****************************
> >>ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
> >>
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >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