Re: [ubl-lcsc] Formulating a response to the UDEF discussions

[Alan.Stitzer@marsh.com]

Tim,

looks good to me!


ajs

<<< Memo from tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au@Internet on 04 December, 2002,
01:32:58 AM Wednesday >>>


tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au@Internet on 4 Dec 2002, 01:32 Wednesday

To:    ubl-lcsc
cc:      (bcc: Alan Stitzer)
Subject:    [ubl-lcsc] Formulating a response to the UDEF discussions


At yesterday's meeting I was tasked with drafting a response to Ron
Shuldt, the chair of the EIA Industry group follow the presentation
Sally gave on the application of UDEF to the work of UBL.  Here is my
first draft.  Please add your thoughts to this and send them directly to
me.  I shall edit these into a final version for submission before
Tuesday 10th Dec.

"The UBL team acknowledge the value of the architectural model described
by UDEF.  The idea of using a hierarchical assembly of objects and their
propoerties which cna be identified by an independant coding system.
 This formalizes a vocabulary and promotes interoperability by allowing
differing names/tags to refer to the same semantic component.

In summary the question that rose to the surface was that this
architecture is somewhat similar to that proposed by ebXML Core
Components with their naming convention and identification scheme
equivalent to the Core Component Technical Specification and the CC UID.
 UDEF could  be described  as a type of Core Component Library.

As UBL is committed to compliance with the ebXML Core Component
Technical Specification, this could create some issues for us.  For
example, if the UDEF Object Tree or Property Tree do not align with the
Core Component Library then we would have potantially duplicate  UDEF
IDs or no equivalent UDEF ID at all.

We therefore have a few further questions we would like to put to the
UDEF team:

1.  How do they see the alignment of the UDEF structures with that of
the CEFACT Core Component work?
2.  How do they see the ongoing governance of the UDEF structures with
that of the CEFACT Core Component work?
3. What added value does the UDEF ID give other than that already
provided by the CC UID (ie they both appear to offer interoperability
mapping)?

We appreciate your advice on thse matters.  As you will appreciate, our
concern is that we do not embark on parallel developments and thereby
create even greater fragmentation in this community.
"

--
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>


To:    ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org@Internet
cc:     (bcc: CN=Alan Stitzer/OU=NYC-NY/OU=US/OU=Marsh/O=MMC)
From:  tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au@Internet