FW: [cpexchange-net] Re: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange ConferenceCall Notes 6/12/01

[Ram Kumar <rkumar@msi.com.au>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Schmelzer [mailto:rschmelzer@zapthink.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 8:05 AM
To: cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com
Cc: cpexchange-net@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cpexchange-net] Re: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference
Call Notes 6/12/01


While this is a good suggestion, it may only be valid if there is a
one-to-one mapping between CIQ and CPExchange data sets. I think the
fundamental designs and purposes of these standards may be different. I
think CIQ was formed without specific knowledge of CPExchange or intent to
be different from the standard, but regardless, the overlap may not be as
close as possible to transform tags in a "simple" manner using XSLT.

For example, if there is no notion of P3P support or Jurisdiction,
CPExchange tags would be left "hanging" with nothing to be transformed to or
from...

In any case, I believe we all need to be much more informed about what is
going on with the CIQ efforts (xNAL, xCIL, et al) before any solutions of
any kind can be proposed. The more you know, the more you win ;)

If Ram is still on this email list, I invite you to participate in this
discussion...

Good luck all!
Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wyke, Allen" <awyke@engage.com>
To: <cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:57 PM
Subject: RE: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference Call Notes 6/12/01


> I think it is also worth nothing that there is a secondary option to
merging
> efforts. While I must admit I have not reviewed the CIQ efforts yet (doing
> so thihs week), I expect we will find that there is a common core set of
> functionality between CIQ and CPExchange. I am also guessing each will
have
> their own features specific to each implementation - otherwise, why would
> the CIQ group being an effort after CPExchange was started?
>
> In any case, a possible and probable solution is to provide an XSLT
> tranformation between the standards. This would provide vendors/users the
> ability to support each effort seemlessly. This also allows each group to
> focus on areas they excel in, without having a merged and bloated
standard.
>
> I will send a more detailed list of comments hopefully by the end of the
day
> Friday.
>
> Allen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart, Leonard
> To: 'cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com'
> Sent: 6/20/01 5:34 PM
> Subject: RE: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference Call Notes  6/12/01
>
> Let me apologize to all for not being available for the conference call.
> As
> you may know GCA is in the middle of transitioning away from PIA (July
> 1),
> and things have been a bit nuts for me trying to coordinate the project.
>
> That stated,  Ron I think you and Ram are correct in terms of reviewing
> possible synergies, and that option is currently under consideration by
> the
> membership.   That is why I commended OASIS-CIQ  site to the members of
> the
> group so folk with a much stronger technical bent than myself could look
> at
> the CIQ messages and use that as a criteria for assessing synergy.  Once
> we
> make such an assessment, we can determine the specifics of any
> integration
> strategy that we would propose.  So the long and short of it is the
> option
> remains open, we very much want to have dialogue with OASIS, but want to
> make sure we have an intelligent dialogue.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Schmelzer [mailto:rschmelzer@zapthink.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 8:01 PM
> To: cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference Call Notes
> 6/12/01
>
>
> While I didn't participate in the conference call, I have been urging
> CPExchange to consider efforts to merge its activities with OASIS. I am
> not
> sure what the direction of the CPexchange group is, but I would highly
> recommend we at least get together with the CIQ group at OASIS and
> identify
> points of synergy. I participated in an earlier conference call when we
> decided that we would evaluate the opportunity to merge efforts. I am
> not
> sure what happened to that option.
>
> If anyone wants to discuss this further with me, please do send me email
> at
> rschmelzer@zapthink.com. For the record, ZapThink supports a merger of
> efforts between CPExchange and OASIS for a number of reasons including
> momentum, current stage of development, and the impact that OASIS has in
> the
> standards arena.
>
> Ron
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ram Kumar" <rkumar@msi.com.au>
> To: <cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 8:05 PM
> Subject: RE: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference Call Notes
> 6/12/01
>
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > I quote the following text from the conference call notes:
> > "All agreed that we should look into what OASIS has accomplished, to
> get
> > ideas for our next version.  However, we should keep the specs apart.
> As
> > one of Leonard's action items, he scanned the OASIS site and e-mailed
> the
> > group a list of the four (4) standards to view, and to be discussed at
> the
> > next conference call or WEBEX conference. "
> >
> > I am  keen to know what CPExchange has decided regarding working with
> OASIS.
> > >From the above text, it appears to me
> > that CPExchange wants to maintains its independent direction despite
> knowing
> > that there is lot of synergy in work between
> > OASIS and CPExchange. Please advise.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Ram
> > Chair
> > CIQ TC
> > OASIS
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Gillespie, Rosemary F. [mailto:rgillespie@printing.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 4:14 AM
> > > To: 'cpexchange-wg@yahoogroups.com'
> > > Subject: [cpexchange-wg] FW: CPExchange Conference Call
> > > Notes  6/12/01
> > >
> > >  << File: Doc3_.doc >>
> >
> >
> > To Post a message, send it to:   cpexchange-wg@eGroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> < http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> <
> http://rd.yahoo.com/M=201903.1435627.3015748.304267/S=1702208620:N/A=590
> 948
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=201903.1435627.3015748.304267/S=1702208620:N/A=59
> 0948>
> /R=2/*
> http://store.yahoo.com/cgi-bin/clink?ydomains+merchant-ad:dmad/M=20190
> <http://store.yahoo.com/cgi-bin/clink?ydomains+merchant-ad:dmad/M=20190>
>
> 3.1435627.3015748.304267/S=1702208620:N/A=590948/R=3/992995531+
> http://domain <http://domain>
> s.yahoo.com/>
> www.
> src=
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   cpexchange-wg@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> < http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> > Service.
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=190481.1491588.3061929.2/S=1702208620:N/A=613957/
> ?http://www.neway.org> www.newaydirect.com
>
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=190481.1491588.3061929.2/D=egroupmail/
> S=1702208620:N/A=613957/rand=342803685>
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   cpexchange-wg@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   cpexchange-wg@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


To Post a message, send it to:   cpexchange-net@eGroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/