[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: FW: [regrep] RE: [uddi-spec] ebXML Registry / UDDI Convergence
Posted for Duane Christina Portillo Advanced Computing Technologist Data Management Services - Architecture & eBusiness The Boeing Company Phone: 206-544-7474 PO Box 3707 M/S 2R-91 Fax: 206- 544-5889 Seattle, WA 98124-2207 christina.portillo@boeing.com ----------------------- xml.web.boeing.com xml.ca.boeing.com ebusiness on the web = XML + JAVA + Web + Controlled Vocabularies -----Original Message----- From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:59 PM To: Portillo, Christina Cc: Breininger, Kathryn R; 'bellwood@us.ibm.com'; 'lclement@microsoft.com'; 'mmealling@verisignlabs.com' Subject: Re: [regrep] RE: [uddi-spec] ebXML Registry / UDDI Convergence Can someone please post the following to the UDDI list? Thanks My original message is posted below. The most significant argument for convergence, IMHO, is the fact that end users like Boeing are saying "We want this". There are many opinions about how the rest of the standards will eventually be put together, but we all seem to agree on the basic architectural principal of an event based architecture using a registry as a key discvery piece. Since we are here (in the standards bodies) to fullfill the needs of the end users, I am in favour of convergence where possible now. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [regrep] RE: [uddi-spec] ebXML Registry / UDDI Convergence Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 09:01:30 -0700 From: Duane Nickull <duane@xmlglobal.com> To: Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com> CC: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org, regrep@lists.oasis-open.org References: <5E52BB26-D225-11D6-B6B8-00039366D620@xmlglobal.com> Here is my $0.02 worth. I feel that it is necessary that the two converge (* qualified statement - read below). A single registry methodology for B2B and A2A is akin to a single DNS resolving methodology for the internet. I also feel that the main barrier to this will not be technical in nature, it will be political. A lot of people have done a lot of *really* great work in UDDI and eXML specs. The whole issue of "You merge into us" vs. "We merge into you" is likely to emerge as a contentious issue. I urge everyone to take 5 minutes, appreciate all the work that has gone into each of the different specs, then ask yourself "Does it really serve the end user to have two different registry specifications?". If we can go forward and assess this on a purely intellectual level, I feel that most will respond "no" and agree that gradually converging the two standards into a new standard that can perform all the functionality of both registries is in the best interest of the end users. I mention the "end user" becuase that is who we ultimately are working for. This would take the world one step closer to true B2B and A2A interoperability, reglardless of whether you build WS* or ebXML related functionality higher up the stack. However, that's just the ramblings of this Canadian. ;-) Duane Nickull -- VP Strategic Relations, Technologies Evangelist XML Global Technologies **************************** ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC