Re: [Fwd: RosettaNet]

[Terry Allen <tallen@sonic.net>]

Bruce Walker wrote:
| Thanks, Terry.  Yes, I am a Sun employee, and thanks for the pointer.
| 
| What we had discussed is what it would take for xml.org to act as a repository for the business process definitions, implementation guidelines, and DTDs which correspond to the
| RosettaNet work products.

A similar issue has arisen wrt UML models in general.  I myself don't see
any reason XML.org should not want to host this material.  What format
are the implementation guidelines in?  (And I assume that the business process
definitions are the UML models for the PIPs; I've seen them only rendered
in PDF; are they to be stored in UML?)
 
| Fundamentally, we're trying to help establish complementary roles for the various standards organizations in which we participate, rather than let them overlap too much.  

That's good thinking on RN's part, and I hope we can help.

| xml.org's
| proposal to act as an open registry/repository is very attractive to us, and I think RosettaNet was hoping not to have to be in that business itself.  The alternative is BizTalk.

I'm not sure Biztalk actually is an alternative, unless you want to convert
everything to XDR.  And the Biztalk Framework is incompatible with the
most recent RNIF.

Bill Smith has been in Australia, but I expect he'll pick up this RN issue
soon.  If not, I'll remind him.

Thanks!



regards, Terry

Terry Allen                             
Advanced Technology Group               
Commerce One, Inc.
Walnut Creek, Calif.
tallen[at]sonic.net