RE: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry

["CRAWFORD, Mark" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>]

Title: RE: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry

Todd,

Sorry, I can't agree.  Your proposal misses the essence of the core components, and fails to adequately capture sufficient metadata to ensure BIE's are usable.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Boyle [mailto:tboyle@rosehill.net]
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 8:20 PM
> To: ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry
>
>
> Whoops, I posted the wrong list!  Hope you find this interesting,
> Respectfully,
> Todd
>
> To: oagis-users@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Calling for a free, open metadata registry
> Cc:
> ebtwg-ccs@lists.ebtwg.org,bl-discussion@lists.commerce.net,xbr
> l-public@yahoogroups.com
>
>
> This is an open request to OAG, which I will also post to other e-
> business metadata standards organizations.
>
> Please establish a free, Core Components registry service on the net.
>
> Provide programmatic and manual interfaces that allow any
> user to upload
> any elements they need, and archive them forever on a read-only basis
> with a GUIDs starting from 00000000001.
>
> Provide a free programmatic interface forever thereafter, so
> that a UID
> can be resolved into its meaning.  Become the "Hotmail" of e-business
> metadata.
>
> The table structure is just an eleven-column table, reflected in the
> initial library of core components, which has not changed since May
> 2001. (The Word doc or PDF doc.)
>
>     0  String    UID
>     1  String    DictionaryEntryName
>     2  String    CCTused
>     3  String    BasicOrAggregate
>     4  String    definition
>     5  String    remarks
>     6  String    ObjectClass
>     7  String    PropertyTerm
>     8  String    RepresentationTerm
>     9  String    BusinessTerms
>     10 String    CoreComponentChildren  (comma-delimited list)
>
> There is no need for ebXML Context, Constaints Language, or
> distinction
> between a Core Component and Business Entity.
>
> A simple CC has no CoreComponentChildren.  Aggregate CCs have
> CoreComponentChildren which may also be Aggregates.  Therefore, entire
> business documents may be represented in this registry.
>
> I have worked with this approach and provide sample python code,
> documentation, and a sample registry at http://www.arapxml.net. (I am
> not an employee of the ARAP Project or its owners, and this message is
> my personal opinion. )
>
> At ebTWG Seattle, Feb. 6th, Arofan Gregory argued at length that the
> requirement of uniqueness in DictionaryEntryName be dropped, thus
> allowing all of the large (incompatible) libraries to be entered into
> ebXML registries entirely, without change.  This allows the
> registry to
> be a one-stop mapping and transformation resource.
>
> Transformation today is an expensive, bilateral, custom job -- because
> of the N-squared problem, cost of tools, and fundamentally
> incompatible
> visions (ISO 11179/reg.rep's, versus UML/BP, vs XML/XSLT etc.)
>
> This free, public registry could provide a 2nd interface dedicated to
> mappings. Thereby, potentially accumulating all of the mappings in the
> world, in computable format. Of course you run straight into the
> constraints language and numerous patented proprietary
> mapping systems.
> Therefore, best approach is the law of the jungle:  let the best
> elements and schemas beat the others to death, in public adoption.
>
> Registry content could be replicated to mirror sites or local caches
> since it would be completely static (write-once, read-only).
>
> I think an organization like OAG should start up this server, pay the
> money to make it blazing fast, and put in the governance to
> prevent any
> tracing or tracking of accesses of the metadata other than to maintain
> usage counts and analytics of data elements for public consideration.
>
> Registry content could be replicated to mirror sites or local caches
> since it would be completely static (write-once, read-only). Licensing
> of mirror sites might require they report usage metrics to a summary
> counter.  So, you may end up with a federation of trusted metadata
> registries.
>
> Registry subsets could be published by orders of magnitude:
> the top 100
> elements, the top 1000 elements, top 10000 elements, etc.
>
> Like the NASDAQ your vocabulary gets bumped out of the top
> 1000 if it's
> not being used. Arcane and rarely-used elements and schemas will be
> demoted into the 10,000,000 element registry subset where it
> takes five
> seconds to get a UID resolved, and there's no computable mapping.
> Meanwhile, ordinary users of the top 1000 will get an element resolved
> in microseconds, from their cache in the local PC.
>
> This server will require adequate technical measures to prevent denial
> of service attacks, intrusion, or other malicious behaviors.
>
> Within a short period of time, the elements having the best conceptual
> definition and shape, would start to see large numbers of users, and
> voila:  A de-facto standard based on usage, instead of the
> decisions of
> dominant vendors.
>
> Some further comments, in this ebTWG Core Components message,
> http://lists.ebtwg.org/archives/ebtwg/200203/msg00047.html
>
> Just one final note.  The ISO 11179 concept of expert, highly skilled
> Registration Authority, is not appropriate to business, because the
> financial and political consequences of metadata design decision
> predominate.  In contrast to scientific domains, business
> metadata lacks
> any sufficient empirical or expert basis for decisionmaking.
>
> The UN/CEFACT has failed to articulate any objective basis and has a
> failure of intellect.  Its vision of central planning and benevolent
> philosopher kings ignores markets, and ignores democratic principles.
>
> Its process for populating registries will be politically delegated to
> its Domains. It has even provided separate "Contexts" in
> registries for
> duplicative implementations of the same semantic entities by domains.
> There is an obvious problem of concentrated benefit and distributed
> cost, i.e. the decisions favor participating organizations at the
> expense of nonparticipating ones: individuals and small business,
> as well as huge segments of the software industry who don't
> participate.
>
> Todd Boyle CPA  9745-128th Ave NE  Kirkland WA
> International Accounting Services, LLC  www.gldialtone.com
> tboyle@rosehill.net  425-827-3107    alt.recovery.ebxml
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>