RE: [regrep] ebXML and UN/CEFACT - Request for Clarification

["Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>]

No, I have not heard anymore about the ISO submission, not had I heard about the UN/CEFACT submission.  I will check on these and get back to you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:12 AM
To: Monica J. Martin; farrukh.najmi@sun.com; Breininger, Kathryn R
Subject: Re: [regrep] ebXML and UN/CEFACT - Request for Clarification


Kathryn,

Adding you to this thread - I had asked you a question below (regarding
ISO 154 rejection), but did not realize that this became a private
thread (I'm used to just hitting "Reply All"). I also think that this
should be discussed on the listserv, per our open policy.

Joe

Joseph Chiusano wrote:
> 
> I think we're talking about two different things here:
> 
> (1) Submission of ebXML specifications to UN/CEFACT
> (2) Submission of ebXML Registry specifications to ISO (?)
> 
> My original message was regarding (1), as I don't believe there is any
> reference to ISO below.
> 
> Since you mention ISO, I assume this is the submission of the ebXML
> Registry specifications as noted in (2) above. If so, this is the first
> I've heard of the rejection.
> 
> Kathryn - would you happen to have more info on the ISO issue?
> 
> Thanks,
> Joe
> 
> "Monica J. Martin" wrote:
> >
> > Was submitted to ISO TC 154 and then denied.
> >
> > Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Monica. Would anyone have insight as to what "put forward" (first
> > > line of Ralph Berwanger's quote below) means?
> > >
> > > "Monica J. Martin" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > FYI.
> > > >
> > > > For everyone as appropriate.
> > > >
> > > > Ralph Berwanger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I understand that the following documents are being put forward.  I
> > > > > believe they are the same documents that were orignally put forward to
> > > > > TC 154.  The documents are: Technical Architecture (TA) V1.04, Business
> > > > > Process Specification Schema (BPSS) V1.01, Registry Information Model
> > > > > (RIM) V2.0, Registry services specification (RS) V2.0, ebXML requirements
> > > > > (REQ) V1.06, Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement specification
> > > > > (CPPA) V2.0, Message Service Specification (MS) V2.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Ralph Berwanger
> > > >
> > > > Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On the main OASIS page, there is a news item titled "OASIS and UN/CEFACT
> > > > > to Host ebXML Showcase at XML Europe 2003 in London" (dated 3/27/03). In
> > > > > that article, Ray Walker (chair of the UN/CEFACT Steering Group) states:
> > > > >
> > > > > <Quote>
> > > > > "We are very pleased that the ebXML specifications will be submitted to
> > > > > the UN/CEFACT plenary immediately following the ebXML Showcase. This
> > > > > should pave the way for a UN recommendation to industry, commerce and
> > > > > governments on the use of ebXML."
> > > > > </Quote>
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone have more insight into this - i.e. which ebXML
> > > > > specifications, what it means to have them submitted to the UN/CEFACT
> > > > > plenary, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance,
> > > > > Joe