Re: [regrep] Summary: Issue with UUID's for Core Components and BIE's

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Farrukh,

Except in so far as to note that a generalized solution should
be preferred by registry - that does not restrict potential
uses - and furthermore - one that encourages adoption
and uptake.  

I'd say one of our overall mission directives is to select
technology solutions that are open and enabling 
standards that foster more and better interoperability.

I like what you proposed on version support and LID
usage for exactly these reasons - that it allows implementers
better flexibility and interoperability.  I believe that solves
this sitution and discussion neatly.

For example - if you wanted to link Oracle Designer or
Popkin Designer say to ebXML Registry - then the
version support would be critical in allowing these tools
to use their existing mechanisms and content labelling
and coding schemes with RR without having to convert 
everything to UUIDs.

Thanks, DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> >
> Any work in the CCReview sub-team I assume is to address the use of CCTS 
> specs in a ebXML Registry context.
> Take ebXML Registry out of tech picture and in my opinion the problems 
> is outside the scope of the ebXML Registry TC or any of its SCs.
>