Thanks for all your feedback...
So, maybe I am
mis-understanding and unclear of the intent and scope of this TC.
Can someone please give me a
real world example/scenario of what is meant by semantic/content
interoperability b/w std. doc. that is completely independent of its
application/use in transactional doc exchange world? Will help me
better understand the scope and value of this TC objective.
Cisco's (my team's) interest in
this potential TC is to provide an end-users (consumers) point of
view/feedback of the current challenges around Stds doc.
interoperability and some real-world requirements around how we plan to
leverage/employ multiple Stds. docs. WS, SOA, etc. to offer process
integration capabilities to our partners.
Mir
Agreed. This proposed TC is dealing with semantic/content
interoperability between document standards. Transactional documents
are out of scope from what has been proposed.
Best regards,
--Scott
David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
Mir,
We need to be careful to separate transactions for documents -
see my reply later in this thread.
The wording of the current docstandards-interop text - needs
to make this absolutely much clearer than it does right now.
You mention several pure transaction standards - and that is
not the use case here. Although from Cisco perspective I could see
using transactions and documents in combination - see my other
reply for more details.
DW
"The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
<
/blockquote>