Re: [regrep] What is an ebXML Registry

["David Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Farrukh,

Thanks for understanding the issues here.

Perhaps

"Federated, Secure Information Management for eBusiness and XML-aware
applications"

although - since its "ebXML Registry" that is kinda redundant - but then
again - stating
the obvious for people is not necessarily redundant.

I'm sensing people wanting to move beyond "eBusiness and XML-aware
applications"
into entirely different domains and paradigms.  We need to be careful here
to be
clear what we are getting into and not losing our core audiences.

For example - the XDS server work I believe is one we need to look deeply at
here - to ensure that that is enshrined into the specifications and called
out - so that
XDS implementers are drawn into the fold - and not feel excluded.

Sending mixed messages as to the core focus of the team is what we
need to be careful to avoid.

Cheers, DW



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [regrep] What is an ebXML Registry


> David Webber (XML) wrote:
>
> >Ivan,
> >
> >I'm agreeing with you, and also with Farrukh!
> >
> >What people miss though is that the ebXML RIM has key tools in
> >there to manage the ebusiness artifacts - that would not be in there
> >in just a "generalized" solution.
> >
> >
> +1
>
> >We sell ourselves dramatically short if we do not highlight the
> >key strengths of ebXML Registry.   So we do need to have the
> >broad message - but then buttress that with assertions about
> >the key applicability to ebusiness.
> >
> >
> I think MAY be able to address this by defining Profiles for various
> focused use cases.
> We have already done so in an ad hoc way with "Registering Web Services"
> and "WSRP".
>
> We need a formal Profile mechanism and then apply this to all the
> profiles including the
> ebXML related ones.
>
> >A broad use-case message is impossibly tough to carry-off,
> >not least because people do *not* recognize when they could
> >be using ebXML registry.  They will more often reject the
> >potential use case on lack of examples in their own domain.
> >That may not make sense - but it is just reality.
> >
> >
> I agree that most people will not grok a broad use case.
>
> However, when we talk about our minimal definition it is different.
> People seem to be quite OK withj a basic open ended definition like:
>
> "Federated, Secure Information Management"
>
> When it comes to use cases it is is an entirely different story.
> Use cases have to be very specific and MUST have specific
> Actors, Roles etc. defined.
>
> So I think we should have:
>
> a) a broad and simple definition
>
> b) Several key use cases that are narrowly focused and have ample detail
> provided
>
> (a) would certainly influence what is or is not included in (b).
> (b) would be the basis for future regrep profiles that we may approve.
>
> >You have to appeal to specific core audiences as a power-base.
> >And while it is true there is a foundation set of functions in
> >registry that can be broadly utilized - we have to understand
> >too that those have been built and architected with certain
> >specific use case areas in mind.... we need to share that
> >information with adopters - and probably in the form of
> >a catalogue of PDF files that document existing uses of
> >registry - advantages, lessons learned, results delivered.
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Farrukh
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: regrep-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: regrep-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>