RE: [regrep] ebXML Registry and Content Management (was Re: [regrep] Meeting agenda and reminder for ebXML Registry telecon December 18th, 2003)

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

I would like to insert a brief clarification here.  In a couple of the
recent e-mails in this string there have been references to ebXML
Registry specs as Content Management Standards.  As I stated in our
telecon yesterday, I believe our intention (ebXML Registry TC) is that
the ebXML Registry specs and standards support and enable content
management, not that the ebXML Registry specs become the definitive
Content Management System standards.  Generally speaking, a Content
Management System includes authoring, check-in/check-out, workflow,
versioning, etc.  An ebXML Registry has broader application in its
enabling of ebusiness, federation features, classification support,
interoperation with other OASIS and ebXML standards, and additional
services, most of which can compliment a CMS.  

We need to bear in mind our charter
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/charter.php and how
functionality we add affects our interoperability as well as the
requirements for core components, BP, CPPA, etc.  There are areas of
overlap it is true: an ebXML Registry manages metadata about the
registered objects, and a CMS manages metadata as well.  However, an
ebXML Registry has a larger and slightly different scope and as such it
can support and enable content management, but is not a standard
developed specifically for CMS.

Kathryn

-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 12:34 PM
To: Collins, Jeff
Cc: ebXML Regrep (ebXML Regrep)
Subject: [regrep] ebXML Registry and Content Management (was Re:
[regrep] Meeting agenda and reminder for ebXML Registry telecon December
18th, 2003)


Collins, Jeff wrote:

>Ok, so i guess i'll follow up with a few more questions:
>
>- What industry vendors have agreed to support this spec so far?
>
I assume by "support" you mean implementors of the ebXML registry (as 
opposed to users of ebXML registry)?
Until recently I used to say that ebXML Registry spec is weak on vendor 
adoption and strong on end-user adoption.
This changed last month when Adobe acquired Yellow Dragon Software to 
leverage their ebXML Registry within their eForms products. Peter, Duane

and Matt represent Adobe on our TC and can give more details.

Sun has an implementation in open source (see my signature).

In addition there are several other implementations listed on our TC
page:

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=regrep

Finally, there are those that we keep discovering. At XML 2003 I 
discovered that the
Australian company MSI ( http://www.msi.com.au ) had an ebXMl Registry 
implementation.

But where we are doing even better is in actual end-user adoption and 
deployment. Again see the first link in my signature for a small
example.

>- Has there been any consideration of Portal Server integration use 
>cases with the CM API?
>
As you know Portals and CM have a close relationship with portals being 
the front end and ECM systems being the backend.

Naturally, I see a close relationship between WSRP as a portal standard 
and ebXML Registry as CM standard.
Recognizing that, we have recently formed a liaison with WSRP TC where 
Joe Chiusano and I work in the Publish/Bind/Discover SC under Alan Kropp

of Vignette. Based on initial discussion we feel that ebXMl Registry 
brings a strong value to WSRP and portals.

>- What would a CM vendor use ebXML for today if it doesn't support 
>versioning as defined by the CM products on the market today?  Would it

>be read only?
>
ebXML Registry supports tracking of versions today. It allows for 
implementation specific extensions to support the missing check 
in/checkout type functions. Until we support full versioning this aspect

of CM would not be interoperable. Some interop is better than none in 
the interim.

>- How does ebXML interoperate with WebDAV?
>
ebXML Registry defines an abstract API in UML and then defines normative

bindings to SOAP, HTML and ebXML Messaging. a binding to WebDav has not 
been defined yet. If we see a demand for it we could consider it.

>Overall, are there plans for reference ECM applications?
>
The reference application is the one that was defined in the ebXML 
Architecture as an eBusiness artifacts registry for CPP/A, BPSS and CC. 
Another reference application is Web Service publish/discovery. These 
applications are deployed at Sun and other places. I would love to see a

WSRP publish/bind/discover use case as a reference application.

The killer application for ebXML Registry in my opinion is eForms.

>Plans for application support or integration from Portal Vendors or 
>Apache in something like Cocoon?
>
The freebXML Registry project under freebxml.org is where a grassroots 
group of vendor and user companies are working together on ebXML
Registry.

>How would a vendor achieve benefit from committing resources to this 
>specification?
>  
>
Like any other standards work, a vendor should only get involved if they

feel the standard is important to their future. By getting involved they

make sure that their customer/product needs are met within the standard 
and that they are not stuck with a lot of baggage that they do not wish 
to implement in their products.

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh

Content Enable your enterprise with the freebXML Registry:

http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/presentations/freebXMLRegistryBrochure.pd
f
http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net
--



To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgr
oup.php.